Cited by 83Recommender Systems and TechniquesInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research

Towards Automated Neural Interaction Discovery for Click-Through Rate Prediction

Open access
Song, Qingquan, Cheng, Dehua, Zhou, Hanning, Yang, Jiyan, Tian, Yuandong, Hu, Xia·2020·Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining

Abstract

Click-Through Rate (CTR) prediction is one of the most important machine learning tasks in recommender systems, driving personalized experience for billions of consumers. Neural architecture search (NAS), as an emerging field, has demonstrated its capabilities in discovering powerful neural network architectures, which motivates us to explore its potential for CTR predictions. Due to 1) diverse unstructured feature interactions, 2) heterogeneous feature space, and 3) high data volume and intrinsic data randomness, it is challenging to construct, search, and compare different architectures effectively for recommendation models. To address these challenges, we propose an automated interaction architecture discovering framework for CTR prediction named AutoCTR. Via modularizing simple yet representative interactions as virtual building blocks and wiring them into a space of direct acyclic graphs, AutoCTR performs evolutionary architecture exploration with learning-to-rank guidance at the architecture level and achieves acceleration using low-fidelity model. Empirical analysis demonstrates the effectiveness of AutoCTR on different datasets comparing to human-crafted architectures. The discovered architecture also enjoys generalizability and transferability among different datasets.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3394486.3403137

Cites

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?

  • 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.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Song, Q., Cheng, D., Zhou, H., Yang, J., Tian, Y., & Hu, X.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Meta (United States) (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining
Publisher
ACM
Published
2020-08-20
Pages
945-955
OpenAlex
W3041360407
Cited by
83
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 6
FWCI
12.32
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (W911NF-16-1-0565, FA8750-17-2-0116)
  • National Science Foundation (IIS-1657196, IIS-1718840)
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
click-through rate prediction, neural architecture search, recommender systems, feature interaction, learning to rank

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