Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the effectiveness of offline return-to-go (RTG) conditioning in Decision Transformers for recommendation systems, focusing on the impact of intervention locality on controllability. By comparing full-context RTG interventions to local token rewrites across two datasets, MovieLens and MyAnimeList, the authors reveal significant differences in predictive shifts, particularly noting a 23.61 percentage point increase in Crime predictions with full-context interventions. However, the lack of response in the MyAnimeList dataset suggests that the effectiveness of RTG conditioning may vary significantly depending on the dataset and genre, indicating the need for careful auditing of intervention strategies.
Full-context interventions in Decision Transformers can dramatically shift predictions, but the effectiveness is highly dataset-dependent, revealing potential pitfalls in RTG conditioning.
Offline return-to-go (RTG) sweeps can test whether a recommender conditioned on return is controllable, but the intervention is rarely audited. Rewriting every historical RTG token creates an increasingly synthetic context, while rewriting only the current token is more local. We test this distinction in an offline setting with a fixed window. On MovieLens 25M and MyAnimeList 2020 (MAL), we evaluate a Decision Transformer using an RTG locality ladder, a control without RTG, a logged match and score reward check, and a within-trajectory shuffled RTG ablation. On MovieLens, a $K=20$ intervention that covers the full context, applied only to real context positions, shifts the share of Crime predictions by $+23.61 \pm 2.96$ percentage points from the validation 5th to 95th percentile, whereas changing only the current slot shifts it by $+1.77 \pm 1.17$ points. The shuffled RTG model largely removes this response ($+2.08 \pm 1.20$ points at $K=20$). On MAL, the same protocol does not produce a Drama response: $K=20$ changes Drama by $-0.03 \pm 0.07$ points, and $K=1$ by $-0.01 \pm 0.01$. Genre prediction accuracy is numerically close across real RTG, no RTG, and shuffled RTG, and at $K=1$ logged match rates and matched ratings change little. Because dataset and focus-genre selection were exploratory, these magnitudes are descriptive; the cross-diagnostic pattern across locality, shuffled RTG, and the null result on MAL does not establish reward control. We propose four checks: intervention locality, a no-RTG baseline, a reward check, and RTG-content ablation.
