Cited by 172Recommender Systems and TechniquesExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Topic Modeling

Personalized Prompt Learning for Explainable Recommendation

Open access
Li, Lei, Zhang, Yongfeng, Chen, Li·2023·ACM Transactions on Information Systems

Abstract

Providing user-understandable explanations to justify recommendations could help users better understand the recommended items, increase the system’s ease of use, and gain users’ trust. A typical approach to realize it is natural language generation. However, previous works mostly adopt recurrent neural networks to meet the ends, leaving the potentially more effective pre-trained Transformer models under-explored. In fact, user and item IDs, as important identifiers in recommender systems, are inherently in different semantic space as words that pre-trained models were already trained on. Thus, how to effectively fuse IDs into such models becomes a critical issue. Inspired by recent advancement in prompt learning, we come up with two solutions: find alternative words to represent IDs (called discrete prompt learning) and directly input ID vectors to a pre-trained model (termed continuous prompt learning). In the latter case, ID vectors are randomly initialized but the model is trained in advance on large corpora, so they are actually in different learning stages. To bridge the gap, we further propose two training strategies: sequential tuning and recommendation as regularization. Extensive experiments show that our continuous prompt learning approach equipped with the training strategies consistently outperforms strong baselines on three datasets of explainable recommendation.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3580488

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • With extensive training data, LLMs adeptly harness human language, encompassing context, metaphors, and complex syntax, equipping them to craft customized explanations that are precise, natural, and adaptable to various user preferences.

    “Firstly, with the leverage of extensive training data, LLMs adeptly harness human language, encompassing context, metaphors, and complex syntax. This equips them to craft customized explanations that are precise, natural, and adaptable to various user preferences [141, 144, 153], mitigating the limitations of conventional, formulaic explanations.”

    From When large language models meet personalization: perspectives of challenges and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as [153]

    Section 3.1 describes language models trained on large text corpora, and Section 5.4 links that training to richer explanations from PEPLER. The Introduction and Conclusion support personalized, high-quality recommendation explanations. The paper does not establish the claimed facility with metaphors or complex syntax, or that LLM-generated explanations are generally precise across user preferences. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 49 · Cited by 172

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. Qingyao Ai, Vahid Azizi, Xu Chen, and Yongfeng Zhang. 2018. Learning heterogeneous knowledge base embeddings for explainable recommendation. Algorithms 11, 9 (2018), 137.
  2. Zeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, and Zhao Song. 2019. A convergence theory for deep learning via over- parameterization. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 242-252.
  3. Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
  4. Hanxiong Chen, Xu Chen, Shaoyun Shi, and Yongfeng Zhang. 2019. Generate natural language explanations for rec- ommendation. In Proceedings of SIGIR'19 Workshop on ExplainAble Recommendation and Search. ACM.
  5. Li Dong, Nan Yang, Wenhui Wang, Furu Wei, Xiaodong Liu, Yu Wang, Jianfeng Gao, Ming Zhou, and Hsiao-Wuen Hon. 2019. Unified language model pre-training for natural language understanding and generation. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 13063-13075.
  6. Zuohui Fu, Yikun Xian, Ruoyuan Gao, Jieyu Zhao, Qiaoying Huang, Yingqiang Ge, Shuyuan Xu, Shijie Geng, Chirag Shah, Yongfeng Zhang, et al. 2020. Fairness-aware explainable recommendation over knowledge graphs. In Proceedings of the 43rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval.
  7. Xiangnan He, Tao Chen, Min-Yen Kan, and Xiao Chen. 2015. Trirank: Review-aware explainable recommendation by modeling aspects. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Manage- ment. 1661-1670.
  8. Xiangnan He, Lizi Liao, Hanwang Zhang, Liqiang Nie, Xia Hu, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2017. Neural collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 173-182.
  9. Junjie Li, Haoran Li, and Chengqing Zong. 2019. Towards personalized review summarization via user-aware sequence network. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 33. 6690-6697.
  10. Lei Li, Li Chen, and Ruihai Dong. 2021. CAESAR: Context-aware explanation based on supervised attention for service recommendations. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 57, 1 (2021), 147-170.
  11. Lei Li, Li Chen, and Yongfeng Zhang. 2020. Towards controllable explanation generation for recommender systems via neural template. In Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020. 198-202.
  12. Lei Li, Yongfeng Zhang, and Li Chen. 2020. Generate neural template explanations for recommendation. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 755-764.
  13. Lei Li, Yongfeng Zhang, and Li Chen. 2021. EXTRA: Explanation ranking datasets for explainable recommendation. In Proceedings of the 44th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 2463-2469.
  14. Lei Li, Yongfeng Zhang, and Li Chen. 2021. Personalized transformer for explainable recommendation. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 4947-4957.
  15. Raymond Li, Samira Ebrahimi Kahou, Hannes Schulz, Vincent Michalski, Laurent Charlin, and Chris Pal. 2018. To- wards deep conversational recommendations. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
  16. Xiang Lisa Li and Percy Liang. 2021. Prefix-tuning: Optimizing continuous prompts for generation. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 4582-4597.
  17. Paul Pu Liang, Chiyu Wu, Louis-Philippe Morency, and Ruslan Salakhutdinov. 2021. Towards understanding and mitigating social biases in language models. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 6565-6576.
  18. Peter J. Liu, Mohammad Saleh, Etienne Pot, Ben Goodrich, Ryan Sepassi, Lukasz Kaiser, and Noam Shazeer. 2018. Generating wikipedia by summarizing long sequences. In The 6th International Conference on Learning Representations.
  19. Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. 2019. Decoupled weight decay regularization. In International Conference on Learn- ing Representations.
  20. Andriy Mnih and Russ R. Salakhutdinov. 2007. Probabilistic matrix factorization. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 1257-1264.
  21. Jianmo Ni, Jiacheng Li, and Julian McAuley. 2019. Justifying recommendations using distantly-labeled reviews and fine-grained aspects. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP'19). 188-197.
  22. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 5998-6008.

Authors
Li, L., Zhang, Y., & Chen, L.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong Baptist University (HK)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Venue
ACM Transactions on Information Systems
Published
2023-03-23
Volume
41
Issue
4
Pages
1-26
ISSN
  • 1046-8188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-2868
OpenAlex
W4360612299
Cited by
172
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 3
FWCI
39.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM Transactions on Information Systems (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • Hong Kong RGC GRF (RGC/HKBU12201620)
  • Hong Kong Baptist University IG-FNRA (RC-FNRA-IG/21-22/SCI/01)
  • NSF (IIS-1910154, 2007907, and 2046457)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
explainable recommendation, prompt learning, recommender systems, natural language generation, pre-trained transformer 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