The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Item-based top-N recommendation algorithms
Abstract
The explosive growth of the world-wide-web and the emergence of e-commerce has led to the development of recommender systems---a personalized information filtering technology used to identify a set of items that will be of interest to a certain user. User-based collaborative filtering is the most successful technology for building recommender systems to date and is extensively used in many commercial recommender systems. Unfortunately, the computational complexity of these methods grows linearly with the number of customers, which in typical commercial applications can be several millions. To address these scalability concerns model-based recommendation techniques have been developed. These techniques analyze the user--item matrix to discover relations between the different items and use these relations to compute the list of recommendations.In this article, we present one such class of model-based recommendation algorithms that first determines the similarities between the various items and then uses them to identify the set of items to be recommended. The key steps in this class of algorithms are (i) the method used to compute the similarity between the items, and (ii) the method used to combine these similarities in order to compute the similarity between a basket of items and a candidate recommender item. Our experimental evaluation on eight real datasets shows that these item-based algorithms are up to two orders of magnitude faster than the traditional user-neighborhood based recommender systems and provide recommendations with comparable or better quality.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases
Agrawal, R., Imieliński, T., & Swami, A. (1993) · Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data · doi:10.1145/170035.170072 · Cited by 14,907
Mining frequent patterns without candidate generation
Han, J., Pei, J., & Yin, Y. (2000) · ACM SIGMOD Record · doi:10.1145/335191.335372 · Cited by 6,402
Cited by
The use of machine learning algorithms in recommender systems: a systematic review
Portugal, I., Alencar, P., & Cowan, D. (2018) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2017.12.020 · Cited by 743
Towards Making Systems Forget with Machine Unlearning
Cao, Y., & Yang, J. (2015) · 2015 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy · doi:10.1109/sp.2015.35 · Cited by 622
"You Might Also Like:" Privacy Risks of Collaborative Filtering
Calandrino, J. A., Kilzer, A., Narayanan, A., Felten, E. W., & Shmatikov, V. (2011) · 2011 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy · doi:10.1109/sp.2011.40 · Cited by 311
Random Walks: A Review of Algorithms and Applications
Xia, F., Liu, J., Nie, H., Fu, Y., Wan, L., & Kong, X. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tetci.2019.2952908 · Cited by 295
Interactive collaborative filtering
Zhao, X., Zhang, W., & Wang, J. (2013) · Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/2505515.2505690 · Cited by 165
Evolution and impact of bias in human and machine learning algorithm interaction
Sun, W., Nasraoui, O., & Shafto, P. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0235502 · Cited by 116
Green AI: do deep learning frameworks have different costs?
Georgiou, S., Kechagia, M., Sharma, T., Sarro, F., & Zou, Y. (2022) · Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3510003.3510221 · Cited by 102
Anomaly-Based Insider Threat Detection Using Deep Autoencoders
Liu, L., De Vel, O., Chen, C., Zhang, J., & Xiang, Y. (2018) · 2018 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW) · doi:10.1109/icdmw.2018.00014 · Cited by 79
Membership Inference Attacks Against Recommender Systems
Zhang, M., Ren, Z., Wang, Z., Ren, P., Chen, Z., Hu, P., & Zhang, Y. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security · doi:10.1145/3460120.3484770 · Cited by 76
Transforming Digital Marketing with Generative AI
Islam, T., Miron, A., Nandy, M., Choudrie, J., Liu, X., & Li, Y. (2024) · Computers · doi:10.3390/computers13070168 · Cited by 68
RAH! RecSys–Assistant–Human: A Human-Centered Recommendation Framework With LLM Agents
Shu, Y., Zhang, H., Gu, H., Zhang, P., Lu, T., Li, D., & Gu, N. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems · doi:10.1109/tcss.2024.3404039 · Cited by 66
Swarm Intelligence Techniques in Recommender Systems-a Review of Recent Research
Peška, L., Tashu, T. M., & Horváth, T. (2019) · Swarm and Evolutionary Computation · doi:10.1016/j.swevo.2019.04.003 · Cited by 54
Personalised Reranking of Paper Recommendations Using Paper Content and User Behavior
Li, X., Chen, Y., Pettit, B., & Rijke, M. D. (2019) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3312528 · Cited by 46
An Interactive Personalized Recommendation System Using the Hybrid Algorithm Model
Guo, Y., Wang, M., & Li, X. (2017) · Symmetry · doi:10.3390/sym9100216 · Cited by 36
Deep Learning Models for Serendipity Recommendations: A Survey and New Perspectives
Fu, Z., Niu, X., & Maher, M. L. (2024) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3605145 · Cited by 30
User Consented Federated Recommender System Against Personalized Attribute Inference Attack
Hu, Q., & Song, Y. (2024) · Proceedings of the 17th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3616855.3635830 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Deshpande, M., & Karypis, G.
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Information Systems
- Published
- 2004-01
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 143-177
- ISSN
- 1046-8188 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2868
- OpenAlex
- W2142144955
- Cited by
- 2,164
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 114.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.
