Cited by 313Recommender Systems and TechniquesInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorTopic Modeling

Neural Rating Regression with Abstractive Tips Generation for Recommendation

Open access
Li, Piji, Wang, Zihao, Ren, Zhaochun, Bing, Lidong, Lam, Wai·2017·Proceedings of the 40th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval

Abstract

Recently, some E-commerce sites launch a new interaction box called Tips on their mobile apps. Users can express their experience and feelings or provide suggestions using short texts typically several words or one sentence. In essence, writing some tips and giving a numerical rating are two facets of a user's product assessment action, expressing the user experience and feelings. Jointly modeling these two facets is helpful for designing a better recommendation system. While some existing models integrate text information such as item specifications or user reviews into user and item latent factors for improving the rating prediction, no existing works consider tips for improving recommendation quality. We propose a deep learning based framework named NRT which can simultaneously predict precise ratings and generate abstractive tips with good linguistic quality simulating user experience and feelings. For abstractive tips generation, gated recurrent neural networks are employed to "translate'' user and item latent representations into a concise sentence. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets from different domains show that NRT achieves significant improvements over the state-of-the-art methods. Moreover, the generated tips can vividly predict the user experience and feelings.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3077136.3080822

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Early natural language generation work mainly relied on recurrent neural networks and often suffers from insufficient diversity due to limited model expressiveness.

    “Early work [139-141] mainly relied on recurrent neural networks (e.g., LSTM [142], GRU [143]). Limited by the model's expressiveness, they often suffer from the issue of insufficient diversity.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, P., Wang, Z., Ren, Z., Bing, L., & Lam, W.
Affiliations
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Jingdong (China) (CN)
  • Tencent (China) (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the 40th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval
Publisher
ACM
Published
2017-08-07
Pages
345-354
OpenAlex
W2739992143
Cited by
313
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 4
FWCI
22.68
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (14203414)
  • Microsoft Research Asia Urban Informatics (FY14-RES-Sponsor-057)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
rating prediction, recommender systems, user experience, e-commerce, gated recurrent neural networks, online reviews

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