Cited by 1,265Recommender Systems and TechniquesComplex Network Analysis TechniquesAdvanced Graph Neural Networks

Random-Walk Computation of Similarities between Nodes of a Graph with Application to Collaborative Recommendation

Fouss, Francois, Pirotte, Alain, Renders, Jean-michel, Saerens, Marco·2007·IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering

Abstract

This work presents a new perspective on characterizing the similarity between elements of a database or, more generally, nodes of a weighted and undirected graph. It is based on a Markov-chain model of random walk through the database. More precisely, we compute quantities (the average commute time, the pseudoinverse of the Laplacian matrix of the graph, etc.) that provide similarities between any pair of nodes, having the nice property of increasing when the number of paths connecting those elements increases and when the "length" of paths decreases. It turns out that the square root of the average commute time is a Euclidean distance and that the pseudoinverse of the Laplacian matrix is a kernel matrix (its elements are inner products closely related to commute times). A principal component analysis (PCA) of the graph is introduced for computing the subspace projection of the node vectors in a manner that preserves as much variance as possible in terms of the Euclidean commute-time distance. This graph PCA provides a nice interpretation to the "Fiedler vector," widely used for graph partitioning. The model is evaluated on a collaborative-recommendation task where suggestions are made about which movies people should watch based upon what they watched in the past. Experimental results on the MovieLens database show that the Laplacian-based similarities perform well in comparison with other methods. The model, which nicely fits into the so-called "statistical relational learning" framework, could also be used to compute document or word similarities, and, more generally, it could be applied to machine-learning and pattern-recognition tasks involving a relational database

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tkde.2007.46

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fouss, F., Pirotte, A., Renders, J.-M., & Saerens, M.
Affiliations
  • UCLouvain (BE)
  • Xerox (France) (FR)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
Published
2007-03
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
355-369
ISSN
1041-4347 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2161984370
Cited by
1,265
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 71 · 2021: 111 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 88 · 2018: 100 · 2017: 88 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 75 · 2014: 96 · 2013: 77 · 2012: 75
FWCI
118.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
Keywords
node similarity, random walks, commuting time, Fiedler vector, collaborative recommendation, recommender systems, statistical relational learning, weighted undirected graphs, kernel matrix, document similarity

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