Cited by 9,135Recommender Systems and TechniquesAdvanced Bandit Algorithms ResearchInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior

Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms

Sarwar, Badrul, Karypis, George, Konstan, Joseph, Riedl, John·2001·Proceedings of the 10th international conference on World Wide Web

Abstract

Recommender systems apply knowledge discovery techniques to the problem of making personalized recommendations for information, products or services during a liveinteraction. These systems, especially the k-nearest neighbor collaborative ltering based ones, are achieving widespread success on the Web. The tremendous growth in the amountofavailable information and the number of visitors to Web sites in recentyears poses some key challenges for recommender systems. These are: producing high quality recommendations, performing many recommendations per second for millions of users and items and achieving high coverage in the face of data sparsity. In traditional collaborative ltering systems the amountofwork increases with the number of participants in the system. New recommender system technologies are needed that can quickly produce high quality recommendations, even for very large-scale problems. To address these issues we have explored item-based collaborative ltering techniques. Item-based techniques rst analyze the user-item matrix to identify relationships between dierent items, and then use these relationships to indirectly compute recommendations for users. In this paper we analyze dierent item-based recommendation generation algorithms. Welookinto dierenttechniques for computing item-item similarities (e.g., item-item correlation vs. cosine similarities between item vectors) and dierenttechniques for obtaining recommendations from them (e.g., weighted sum vs. regression model). Finally, weexperimentally evaluate our results and compare them to the basic k-nearest neighbor approach. Our experiments suggest that item-based algorithms provide dramatically better performance than user-based algorithms, while at the same time providing better quality than th...

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/371920.372071

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Sarwar, B., Karypis, G., Konstan, J., & Riedl, J.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 10th international conference on World Wide Web
Publisher
ACM
Published
2001-04
Pages
285-295
OpenAlex
W2042281163
Cited by
9,135
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 240 · 2025: 393 · 2024: 484 · 2023: 489 · 2022: 537 · 2021: 673 · 2020: 584 · 2019: 631 · 2018: 568 · 2017: 534 · 2016: 503 · 2015: 505 · 2014: 444 · 2013: 450 · 2012: 414
FWCI
53.50
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Advanced Bandit Algorithms Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
Keywords
item-based collaborative filtering, recommender systems, personalized recommendation, item-item similarity, cosine similarity, user-item matrix, data sparsity, k-nearest neighbor comparison, large-scale recommendation

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