Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 88 of the 88 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deep Learning Models for Serendipity Recommendations: A Survey and New Perspectives

Fu, Zhe, Niu, Xi, Maher, Mary Lou·2024·ACM Computing Surveys
DOI 10.1145/3605145
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Serendipitous recommendations have emerged as a compelling approach to deliver users with unexpected yet valuable information, contributing to heightened user satisfaction and engagement. This survey presents an investigation of the most recent research in serendipity recommenders, with a specific emphasis on deep learning recommendation models. We categorize these models into three types, distinguishing their integration of the serendipity objective across distinct stages: pre-processing, in-processing, and post-processing. Additionally, we provide a review and summary of the serendipity definition, available ground truth datasets, and evaluation experiments employed in the field. We propose three promising avenues for future exploration: (1) leveraging user reviews to identify and explore serendipity, (2) employing reinforcement learning to construct a model for discerning appropriate timing for serendipitous recommendations, and (3) utilizing cross-domain learning to enhance serendipitous recommendations. With this review, we aim to cultivate a deeper understanding of serendipity in recommender systems and inspire further advancements in this domain.

Overview

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 · 10.1145/3605145

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. A. G. Borselli. 1965. Serendipity and the three princes: From the Peregrinaggio of 1557 Theodore G. Remer (Ed.). University of Oklahoma Press Norman OK. (The compilation of the work here is regarded as probably by Michele Tramezzino and translated by Augusto G. Borselli and Theresa L. Borselli.)
  2. Fakhri Abbas and Xi Niu. 2019. Computational serendipitous recommender system frameworks: A literature survey. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE/ACS 16th International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA’19). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1–8.
  3. Satoko Inoue and Masataka Tokumaru. 2020. Serendipity recommender system for academic disciplines. In Proceedings of the 2020 Joint 11th International Conference on Soft Computing and Intelligent Systems and the 21st International Symposium on Advanced Intelligent Systems (SCIS-ISIS’20). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1–4.
  4. Shoujin Wang, Liang Hu, Longbing Cao, Xiaoshui Huang, Defu Lian, and Wei Liu. 2018. Attention-based transactional context embedding for next-item recommendation. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 32.
  5. Ludovik Coba, Panagiotis Symeonidis, and Markus Zanker. 2018. Novelty-aware matrix factorization based on items’ popularity. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence. 516–527.
  6. Pranita Shrestha, Min Zhang, Yiqun Liu, and Shaoping Ma. 2020. Curiosity-inspired personalized recommendation. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT’20). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 33–40.
  7. Xi Niu, Wlodek Zadrozny, Kazjon Grace, and Weimao Ke. 2018. Computational surprise in information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 1427–1429.
  8. Marwa Hussien Mohamed, Mohamed Helmy Khafagy, Heba Elbeh, and Ahmed Mohamed Abdalla. 2019. Sparsity and cold start recommendation system challenges solved by hybrid feedback. International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology 12, 12 (2019), 2735–2742.
  9. Tao Wang, Xiaoyu Shi, and Mingsheng Shang. 2020. Diversity-aware top-n recommendation: A deep reinforcement learning way. In Proceedings of the CCF Conference on Big Data. 226–241.
  10. Leo Iaquinta, Marco De Gemmis, Pasquale Lops, Giovanni Semeraro, Michele Filannino, and Piero Molino. 2008. Introducing serendipity in a content-based recommender system. In Proceedings of the 2008 8th International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 168–173.
  11. Max Welling and Thomas N. Kipf. 2016. Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR’17).
  12. Kazjon Grace, Mary Lou Maher, Nicholas Davis, and Omar Eltayeby. 2018. Surprise walks: Encouraging users towards novel concepts with sequential suggestions. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC’18).
  13. Xueqi Li, Wenjun Jiang, Weiguang Chen, Jie Wu, Guojun Wang, and Kenli Li. 2020. Directional and explainable serendipity recommendation. In Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020. 122–132.
  14. 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 Proceedings of the 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS’17) .
  15. Travis Ebesu, Bin Shen, and Yi Fang. 2018. Collaborative memory network for recommendation systems. In Proceedings of the 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 515–524.
  16. Guanjie Zheng, Fuzheng Zhang, Zihan Zheng, Yang Xiang, Nicholas Jing Yuan, Xing Xie, and Zhenhui Li. 2018. DRN: A deep reinforcement learning framework for news recommendation. In Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference. 167–176.
  17. Rupert G. Miller Jr. 2011. Survival Analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
  18. Himan Abdollahpouri, Robin Burke, and Bamshad Mobasher. 2019. Managing popularity bias in recommender systems with personalized re-ranking. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference (FLAIRS’19).
  19. James Bennett and Stan Lanning. 2007. The Netflix Prize. In Proceedings of the KDD Cup and Workshop, Vol. 2007. ACM, New York, NY, 1–4.
  20. Jinoh Oh, Sun Park, Hwanjo Yu, Min Song, and Seung-Taek Park. 2011. Novel recommendation based on personal popularity tendency. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 507–516.
  21. Yong Wang, Jingyuan Wang, and Li Li. 2018. Enhancing long tail recommendation based on user’s experience evolution. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD’18). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 25–30.
  22. Jingjing Li, Mengmeng Jing, Ke Lu, Lei Zhu, Yang Yang, and Zi Huang. 2019. From zero-shot learning to cold-start recommendation. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 33. 4189–4196.

Metadata

Authors
Fu, Z., Niu, X., & Maher, M. L.
Venue
ACM Computing Surveys
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
2023-08-26
Volume
56
Issue
1
Pages
1-26
ISSN
  • 0360-0300
  • 1557-7341
DOI
10.1145/3605145
Cited by
30
References
88
Language
en
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1910696)

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.