The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Avoiding monotony: improving the diversity of recommendation lists
Abstract
The primary premise upon which top-N recommender systems operate is that similar users are likely to have similar tastes with regard to their product choices. For this reason, recommender algorithms depend deeply on similarity metrics to build the recommendation lists for end-users.However, it has been noted that the products offered on recommendation lists are often too similar to each other and attention has been paid towards the goal of improving diversity to avoid monotonous recommendations.Noting that the retrieval of a set of items matching a user query is a common problem across many applications of information retrieval, we model the competing goals of maximizing the diversity of the retrieved list while maintaining adequate similarity to the user query as a binary optimization problem. We explore a solution strategy to this optimization problem by relaxing it to a trust-region problem.This leads to a parameterized eigenvalue problem whose solution is finally quantized to the required binary solution. We apply this approach to the top-N prediction problem, evaluate the system performance on the Movielens dataset and compare it with a standard item-based top-N algorithm. A new evaluation metric ItemNovelty is proposed in this work. Improvements on both diversity and accuracy are obtained compared to the benchmark algorithm.
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
Introduction to information retrieval
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.46-2715 · Cited by 12,278
Cited by
Bias in algorithmic filtering and personalization
Bozdag, E. (2013) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1007/s10676-013-9321-6 · Cited by 649
Kaminskas, M., & Bridge, D. (2017) · ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1145/2926720 · Cited by 465
Diversity in Big Data: A Review
Drosou, M., Jagadish, H. V., Pitoura, E., & Stoyanovich, J. (2017) · Big Data · doi:10.1089/big.2016.0054 · Cited by 140
Li, Z. (., Fang, X., & Sheng, O. R. L. (2018) · ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3131782 · Cited by 65
Swarm Intelligence Techniques in Recommender Systems-a Review of Recent Research
Peška, L., Tashu, T. M., & Horváth, T. (2019) · Swarm and Evolutionary Computation · doi:10.1016/j.swevo.2019.04.003 · Cited by 54
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, M., & Hurley, N.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Recommender systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2008-10-23
- Pages
- 123-130
- OpenAlex
- W2097951507
- Cited by
- 456
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.02
- Type
- conference paper
- 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.