The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Convolutional Matrix Factorization for Document Context-Aware Recommendation
Abstract
Sparseness of user-to-item rating data is one of the major factors that deteriorate the quality of recommender system. To handle the sparsity problem, several recommendation techniques have been proposed that additionally consider auxiliary information to improve rating prediction accuracy. In particular, when rating data is sparse, document modeling-based approaches have improved the accuracy by additionally utilizing textual data such as reviews, abstracts, or synopses. However, due to the inherent limitation of the bag-of-words model, they have difficulties in effectively utilizing contextual information of the documents, which leads to shallow understanding of the documents. This paper proposes a novel context-aware recommendation model, convolutional matrix factorization (ConvMF) that integrates convolutional neural network (CNN) into probabilistic matrix factorization (PMF). Consequently, ConvMF captures contextual information of documents and further enhances the rating prediction accuracy. Our extensive evaluations on three real-world datasets show that ConvMF significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art recommendation models even when the rating data is extremely sparse. We also demonstrate that ConvMF successfully captures subtle contextual difference of a word in a document. Our implementation and datasets are available at http://dm.postech.ac.kr/ConvMF.
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
Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition
Lecun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., & Haffner, P. (1998) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/5.726791 · Cited by 58,805
Cited by
BERT4Rec: Sequential Recommendation with Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformer
Sun, F., Liu, J., Wu, J., Pei, C., Lin, X., Ou, W., & Jiang, P. (2019) · Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/3357384.3357895 · Cited by 2,558
Where to Go Next for Recommender Systems? ID- vs. Modality-based Recommender Models Revisited
Yuan, Z., Yuan, F., Song, Y., Li, Y., Fu, J., Yang, F., Pan, Y., & Ni, Y. (2023) · Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3539618.3591932 · Cited by 200
Optimal Sepsis Patient Treatment using Human-in-the-loop Artificial Intelligence
Gupta, A., Lash, M. T., & Nachimuthu, S. K. (2021) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2020.114476 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, D., Park, C., Oh, J., Lee, S., & Yu, H.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2016-09-07
- Pages
- 233-240
- OpenAlex
- W2515144511
- Cited by
- 769
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 64.39
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Convolutional Matrix Factorization for Document Context-Aware Recommendation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/2959100.2959165
- The paper
- Kim, D., Park, C., Oh, J., Lee, S., & Yu, H. (2016). Convolutional Matrix Factorization for Document Context-Aware Recommendation. Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/2959100.2959165
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.