The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Collaborative recommendation: A robustness analysis
Abstract
Collaborative recommendation has emerged as an effective technique for personalized information access. However, there has been relatively little theoretical analysis of the conditions under which the technique is effective. To explore this issue, we analyse the robustness of collaborative recommendation: the ability to make recommendations despite (possibly intentional) noisy product ratings. There are two aspects to robustness: recommendation accuracy and stability. We formalize recommendation accuracy in machine learning terms and develop theoretically justified models of accuracy. In addition, we present a framework to examine recommendation stability in the context of a widely-used collaborative filtering algorithm. For each case, we evaluate our analysis using several real-world data-sets. Our investigation is both practically relevant for enterprises wondering whether collaborative recommendation leaves their marketing operations open to attack, and theoretically interesting for the light it sheds on a comprehensive theory of collaborative recommendation.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Valiant, L. G. (1984) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/1968.1972 · Cited by 3,279
Cited by
O'Donovan, J., & Smyth, B. (2005) · Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces · doi:10.1145/1040830.1040870 · Cited by 865
Himeur, Y., Sohail, S. S., Bensaali, F., Amira, A., & Alazab, M. (2022) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2022.102746 · Cited by 139
Adversarial attacks on an oblivious recommender
Christakopoulou, K., & Banerjee, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems · doi:10.1145/3298689.3347031 · Cited by 105
Shilling Black-Box Recommender Systems by Learning to Generate Fake User Profiles
Lin, C., Chen, S., Zeng, M., Zhang, S., Gao, M., & Li, H. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2022.3183210 · Cited by 62
Anelli, V. W., Deldjoo, Y., Di Noia, T., Malitesta, D., & Merra, F. A. (2021) · Proceedings of the 44th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3404835.3462848 · Cited by 31
On the Detection of Shilling Attacks in Federated Collaborative Filtering
Jiang, Y., Zhou, Y., Wu, D., Li, C., & Wang, Y. (2020) · 2020 International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems (SRDS) · doi:10.1109/srds51746.2020.00026 · Cited by 22
The Effect of Suspicious Profiles on People Recommenders
Pizzato, L. A., Akehurst, J., Silvestrini, C., Yacef, K., Koprinska, I., & Kay, J. (2012) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31454-4_19 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- O'Mahony, M., Hurley, N., Kushmerick, N., & Silvestre, G.
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Internet Technology
- Published
- 2004-11
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 344-377
- ISSN
- 1533-5399 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-6051
- OpenAlex
- W2000855935
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 59.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.