The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Bayesian Personalized Feature Interaction Selection for Factorization Machines
Abstract
Factorization Machines (FMs) are widely used for feature-based collaborative filtering tasks, as they are very effective at modeling feature interactions. Existing FM-based methods usually take all feature interactions into account, which is unreasonable because not all feature interactions are helpful: incorporating useless feature interactions will introduce noise and degrade the recommendation performance. Recently, methods that perform Feature Interaction Selection (FIS) have attracted attention because of their effectiveness at filtering out useless feature interactions. However, they assume that all users share the same feature interactions, which is not necessarily true, especially for collaborative filtering tasks. In this work, we address this issue and study Personalized Feature Interaction Selection (P-FIS) by proposing a Bayesian Personalized Feature Interaction Selection (BP-FIS) mechanism under the Bayesian Variable Selection (BVS) theory. Specifically, we first introduce interaction selection variables with hereditary spike and slab priors for P-FIS. Then, we form a Bayesian generative model and derive the Evidence Lower Bound (ELBO), which can be optimized by an efficient Stochastic Gradient Variational Bayes (SGVB) method to learn the parameters. Finally, because BP-FIS can be seamlessly integrated with different variants of FMs, we implement two FM variants under the proposed BP-FIS. We carry out experiments on three benchmark datasets. The empirical results demonstrate the effectiveness of BP-FIS for selecting personalized interactions and improving the recommendation performance.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
The search strategy shifts from discrete reinforcement learning to differentiable searching, which adaptively selects architectures within one-shot learning to circumvent computational burden, for more efficient convergence.
“The search strategy shifts from the discrete reinforcement learning process, which iteratively samples architectures for training and is time-consuming, into the differentiable searching, which adaptively selects architectures within one-shot learning to circumvent the computational burden, for more efficient convergence.”
From When large language models meet personalization: perspectives of challenges and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as [186]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 63 · Cited by 26
Research works printed but not linked: 63
- Michal Aharon Natalie Aizenberg Edward Bortnikov Ronny Lempel Roi Adadi and etc. 2013. OFF-set: One-pass Factorization of Feature Sets for Online Recommendation in Persistent Cold Start Settings. In RecSys. ACM 375--378. 10.1145/2507157.2507221 · DOI
- 10.1080/02664763.2018.1432576 · DOI
- 10.5555/2981780.2981790 · DOI
- Mathieu Blondel Akinori Fujino Naonori Ueda and Masakazu Ishihata. 2016. Higher-Order Factorization Machines. In NIPS. 3351--3359. · DOI
- Mathieu Blondel Masakazu Ishihata Akinori Fujino and Naonori Ueda. 2016. Polynomial Networks and Factorization Machines: New Insights and Efficient Training Algorithms. In ICML. ACM 850--858. · DOI
- 10.1145/2043932.2044016 · DOI · Paper page
- Kailong Chen Tianqi Chen Guoqing Zheng Ou Jin Enpeng Yao and Yong Yu. 2012. Collaborative Personalized Tweet Recommendation. In SIGIR. ACM 661--670. 10.1145/2348283.2348372 · DOI
- Yifan Chen, Yang Wang, Xiang Zhao, Hongzhi Yin, Ilya Markov, and Maarten de Rijke. 2019. Local Variational Feature-based Similarity Models for Recommending Top-N New Items. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (2019). To appear.
- Yifan Chen Xiang Zhao and Maarten de Rijke. 2017. Top-N Recommendation with High-dimensional Side Information via Locality Preserving Projection. In SIGIR. ACM 985--988. 10.1145/3077136.3080697 · DOI
- 10.1109/TKDE.2018.2830336 · DOI
- 10.1145/2645710.2645730 · DOI
- Heng-Tze Cheng Levent Koc Jeremiah Harmsen Tal Shaked Tushar Chandra Hrishi Aradhye Glen Anderson Greg Corrado Wei Chai Mustafa Ispir Rohan Anil Zakaria Haque Lichan Hong Vihan Jain Xiaobing Liu and Hemal Shah. 2016. Wide & Deep Learning for Recommender Systems. In DLRS. 7--10. 10.1145/2988450.2988454 · DOI
- 10.1198/jasa.2010.tm08281 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1013164120801 · DOI
- 10.1109/LSP.2006.873139 · DOI
- 10.1145/2827872 · DOI
- Xiangnan He and Tat-Seng Chua. 2017. Neural Factorization Machines for Sparse Predictive Analytics. In SIGIR. ACM 355--364. 10.1145/3077136.3080777 · DOI
- Yuchin Juan Damien Lefortier and Olivier Chapelle. 2017. Field-aware Factorization Machines in a Real-world Online Advertising System. In WWW. 680--688. 10.1145/3041021.3054185 · DOI
- Yu-Chin Juan Yong Zhuang Wei-Sheng Chin and Chih-Jen Lin. 2016. Field-aware Factorization Machines for CTR Prediction. In RecSys. ACM 43--50. 10.1145/2959100.2959134 · DOI
- 10.1145/2487575.2487589 · DOI
- George Karypis. 2001. Evaluation of Item-Based Top-N Recommendation Algorithms. In CIKM. ACM 247--254. 10.1145/502585.502627 · DOI
- Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 2015. Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. In ICLR.
- Diederik P. Kingma and Max Welling. 2014. Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes. In ICLR.
- Noam Koenigstein and Ulrich Paquet. 2013. Xbox Movies Recommendations: Variational Bayes Matrix Factorization with Embedded Feature Selection. In RecSys. ACM 129--136. 10.1145/2507157.2507168 · DOI
- Yehuda Koren. 2008. Factorization Meets the Neighborhood: A Multifaceted Collaborative Filtering Model. In SIGKDD. ACM 426--434. 10.1145/1401890.1401944 · DOI
- Jing Li Pengjie Ren Zhumin Chen Zhaochun Ren Tao Lian and Jun Ma. 2017. Neural Attentive Session-based Recommendation. In CIKM. ACM 1419--1428. 10.1145/3132847.3132926 · DOI
- Jundong Li Liang Wu Harsh Dani and Huan Liu. 2018. Unsupervised Personalized Feature Selection. In AAAI. 3514--3521.
- Dawen Liang Rahul G. Krishnan Matthew D. Hoffman and Tony Jebara. 2018. Variational Autoencoders for Collaborative Filtering. In WWW. 689--698. 10.1145/3178876.3186150 · DOI
- Xiao Lin Wenpeng Zhang Min Zhang Wenwu Zhu Jian Pei Peilin Zhao and Junzhou Huang. 2018. Online Compact Convexified Factorization Machine. In WWW. 1633--1642. 10.1145/3178876.3186075 · DOI
- 10.1145/3018661.3018716 · DOI
- 10.1109/ISM.2017.42 · DOI
- Peter McCullagh and John A. Nelder. 1989. Generalized Linear Models. Vol. 37. CRC press.
- Lei Mei Pengjie Ren Zhumin Chen Liqiang Nie Jun Ma and Jian-Yun Nie. 2018. An Attentive Interaction Network for Context-aware Recommendations. In CIKM. ACM 157--166. 10.1145/3269206.3271813 · DOI
- 10.1080/01621459.1988.10478694 · DOI
- Trung V. Nguyen Alexandros Karatzoglou and Linas Baltrunas. 2014. Gaussian Process Factorization Machines for Context-aware Recommendations. In SIGIR. ACM 63--72. 10.1145/2600428.2609623 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICDM.2011.134 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICDM.2016.0051 · DOI
- Rajiv Pasricha and Julian McAuley. 2018. Translation-based Factorization Machines for Sequential Recommendation. In RecSys. ACM 63--71. 10.1145/3240323.3240356 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICDM.2010.127 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/2168752.2168771 · DOI
- Steffen Rendle. 2012. Learning Recommender Systems with Adaptive Regularization. In WSDM. ACM 133--142. 10.1145/2124295.2124313 · DOI
- 10.5555/1795114.1795167 · DOI
- Steffen Rendle Zeno Gantner Christoph Freudenthaler and Lars Schmidt-Thieme. 2011. Fast Context-aware Recommendations with Factorization Machines. In SIGIR. ACM 635--644. 10.1145/2009916.2010002 · DOI
- Steffen Rendle and Lars Schmidt-Thieme. 2010. Pairwise Interaction Tensor Factorization for Personalized Tag Recommendation. In WSDM. ACM 81--90. 10.1145/1718487.1718498 · DOI
- Royi Ronen Noam Koenigstein Elad Ziklik and Nir Nice. 2013. Selecting Content-based Features for Collaborative Filtering Recommenders. In RecSys. ACM 407--410. 10.1145/2507157.2507203 · DOI
- 10.1145/2939672.2939704 · DOI
- 10.5555/2976040.2976207 · DOI
- 10.5555/1481236 · DOI
- Robert Tibshirani. 1996. Regression Shrinkage and Selection via the Lasso. J. Royal Statist. Soci. (1996) 267--288. · DOI · Paper page
- 10.5555/2986459.2986720 · DOI
- Seiya Tokui and Issei Sato. 2016. Reparameterization Trick for Discrete Variables. CoRR, Vol. abs/1611.01239 (2016). arxiv: 1611.01239 · arXiv
- 10.1109/TIP.2012.2207397 · DOI
- 10.1109/TKDE.2015.2415497 · DOI
- 10.1109/TIP.2015.2457339 · DOI
- Mike West. 2003. Bayesian Factor Regression Models in the "Large p, Small n" Paradigm. In Bayesian Statistics. Oxford University Press, 723--732.
- Yao Wu Christopher DuBois Alice X. Zheng and Martin Ester. 2016. Collaborative Denoising Auto-Encoders for Top-N Recommender Systems. In WSDM. ACM 153--162. 10.1145/2835776.2835837 · DOI
- Jun Xiao Hao Ye Xiangnan He Hanwang Zhang Fei Wu and Tat-Seng Chua. 2017. Attentional Factorization Machines: Learning the Weight of Feature Interactions via Attention Networks. In IJCAI. 3119--3125. · DOI
- Jianpeng Xu, Kaixiang Lin, Pang-Ning Tan, and Jiayu Zhou. 2016. Synergies that Matter: Efficient Interaction Selection via Sparse Factorization Machine. In SDM. SIAM, 108--116.
- Makoto Yamada Wenzhao Lian Amit Goyal Jianhui Chen Kishan Wimalawarne and etc. 2017. Convex Factorization Machine for Toxicogenomics Prediction. In SIGKDD. ACM 1215--1224. 10.1145/3097983.3098103 · DOI
- Fajie Yuan Guibing Guo Joemon M. Jose Long Chen Haitao Yu and Weinan Zhang. 2017. BoostFM: Boosted Factorization Machines for Top-N Feature-based Recommendation. In IUI. 45--54. 10.1145/3025171.3025211 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2005.00532.x · DOI · Paper page
- Huan Zhao Quanming Yao Jianda Li Yangqiu Song and Dik Lun Lee. 2017. Meta-Graph Based Recommendation Fusion over Heterogeneous Information Networks. In SIGKDD. ACM 635--644. 10.1145/3097983.3098063 · DOI
- Yong Zheng Robin D. Burke and Bamshad Mobasher. 2013. Recommendation with Differential Context Weighting. In UMAP. 152--164. · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, Y., Ren, P., Wang, Y., & de Rijke, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Hefei University of Technology (CN)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 42nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2019-07-18
- Pages
- 665-674
- OpenAlex
- W2954698196
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4
- FWCI
- 3.19
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR) (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- China Scholarship Council
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (61806035)
- Ahold Delhaize
- Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU)
- Innovation Center for Artificial Intelligence (ICAI)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Advanced Bandit Algorithms Research
- Keywords
- factorization machines, Bayesian variable selection, spike-and-slab prior, collaborative filtering, recommender systems, evidence lower bound, generative models
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