The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of collaborative filtering algorithms: Limitations of current techniques and proposals for scalable, high-performance recommender systems
Abstract
The technique of collaborative filtering is especially successful in generating personalized recommendations. More than a decade of research has resulted in numerous algorithms, although no comparison of the different strategies has been made. In fact, a universally accepted way of evaluating a collaborative filtering algorithm does not exist yet. In this work, we compare different techniques found in the literature, and we study the characteristics of each one, highlighting their principal strengths and weaknesses. Several experiments have been performed, using the most popular metrics and algorithms. Moreover, two new metrics designed to measure the precision on good items have been proposed. The results have revealed the weaknesses of many algorithms in extracting information from user profiles especially under sparsity conditions. We have also confirmed the good results of SVD-based techniques already reported by other authors. As an alternative, we present a new approach based on the interpretation of the tendencies or differences between users and items. Despite its extraordinary simplicity, in our experiments, it obtained noticeably better results than more complex algorithms. In fact, in the cases analyzed, its results are at least equivalent to those of the best approaches studied. Under sparsity conditions, there is more than a 20% improvement in accuracy over the traditional user-based algorithms, while maintaining over 90% coverage. Moreover, it is much more efficient computationally than any other algorithm, making it especially adequate for large amounts of data.
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
Cited by
Kaminskas, M., & Bridge, D. (2017) · ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1145/2926720 · Cited by 465
Al-Hassan, M., Lu, H., & Lu, J. (2015) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2015.02.001 · Cited by 136
Metadata
- Authors
- Cacheda, F., Carneiro, V., Fernández, D., & Formoso, V.
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on the Web
- Published
- 2011-02
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-33
- ISSN
- 1559-1131 (ISSN-L)
- 1559-114X
- OpenAlex
- W2081332171
- Cited by
- 447
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 78.61
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of collaborative filtering algorithms: Limitations of current techniques and proposals for scalable, high-performance recommender systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1921591.1921593
- The paper
- Cacheda, F., Carneiro, V., Fernández, D., & Formoso, V. (2011). Comparison of collaborative filtering algorithms: Limitations of current techniques and proposals for scalable, high-performance recommender systems. ACM Transactions on the Web. https://doi.org/10.1145/1921591.1921593
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.