Cited by 2,558Recommender Systems and TechniquesInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research

BERT4Rec: Sequential Recommendation with Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformer

Sun, Fei, Liu, Jun, Wu, Jian, Pei, Changhua, Lin, Xiao, Ou, Wenwu, Jiang, Peng·2019·Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management

Abstract

Modeling users' dynamic preferences from their historical behaviors is challenging and crucial for recommendation systems. Previous methods employ sequential neural networks to encode users' historical interactions from left to right into hidden representations for making recommendations. Despite their effectiveness, we argue that such left-to-right unidirectional models are sub-optimal due to the limitations including: \begin enumerate* [label=series\itshape\alph*\upshape)] \item unidirectional architectures restrict the power of hidden representation in users' behavior sequences; \item they often assume a rigidly ordered sequence which is not always practical. \end enumerate* To address these limitations, we proposed a sequential recommendation model called BERT4Rec, which employs the deep bidirectional self-attention to model user behavior sequences. To avoid the information leakage and efficiently train the bidirectional model, we adopt the Cloze objective to sequential recommendation, predicting the random masked items in the sequence by jointly conditioning on their left and right context. In this way, we learn a bidirectional representation model to make recommendations by allowing each item in user historical behaviors to fuse information from both left and right sides. Extensive experiments on four benchmark datasets show that our model outperforms various state-of-the-art sequential models consistently.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3357384.3357895

Cites

3 of 3 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sun, F., Liu, J., Wu, J., Pei, C., Lin, X., Ou, W., & Jiang, P.
Affiliations
Alibaba Group (China) (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-11-03
Pages
1441-1450
ISSN
2155-0751 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2984100107
Cited by
2,558
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 522 · 2025: 599 · 2024: 506 · 2023: 402 · 2022: 283 · 2021: 182 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 6
FWCI
105.35
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM) (publishedVersion)
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
BERT4Rec, sequential recommendation, user behavior sequences, dynamic user preferences, information leakage, user representation learning

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