Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How good your recommender system is? A survey on evaluations in recommendation

Open access
Silveira, Thiago, Zhang, Min, Lin, Xiao, Liu, Yiqun, Ma, Shaoping·2019·International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics

Abstract

Recommender Systems have become a very useful tool for a large variety of domains. Researchers have been attempting to improve their algorithms in order to issue better predictions to the users. However, one of the current challenges in the area refers to how to properly evaluate the predictions generated by a recommender system. In the extent of offline evaluations, some traditional concepts of evaluation have been explored, such as accuracy, Root Mean Square Error and P@N for top-k recommendations. In recent years, more research have proposed some new concepts such as novelty, diversity and serendipity. These concepts have been addressed with the goal to satisfy the users’ requirements. Numerous definitions and metrics have been proposed in previous work. On the absence of a specific summarization on evaluations of recommendation combining traditional metrics and recent progresses, this paper surveys and organizes the main research that present definitions about concepts and propose metrics or strategies to evaluate recommendations. In addition, this survey also settles the relationship between the concepts, categorizes them according to their objectives and suggests potential future topics on user satisfaction.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13042-017-0762-9

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Cited by

See all 264

Metadata

Authors
Silveira, T., Zhang, M., Lin, X., Liu, Y., & Ma, S.
Venue
International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics
Published
2017-12-14
Volume
10
Issue
5
Pages
813-831
ISSN
  • 1868-8071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1868-808X
OpenAlex
W2774321216
Cited by
264
References
35
FWCI
18.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How good your recommender system is? A survey on evaluations in recommendation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s13042-017-0762-9
The paper
Silveira, T., Zhang, M., Lin, X., Liu, Y., & Ma, S. (2019). How good your recommender system is? A survey on evaluations in recommendation. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-017-0762-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.