A New Approach to Collaborative Filtering: Operator Estimation with Spectral Regularization
Open accessAbstract
We present a general approach for collaborative filtering (CF) using spectral regularization to learn linear operators from "users" to the "objects" they rate. Recent low-rank type matrix completion approaches to CF are shown to be special cases. However, unlike existing regularization based CF methods, our approach can be used to also incorporate information such as attributes of the users or the objects -- a limitation of existing regularization based CF methods. We then provide novel representer theorems that we use to develop new estimation methods. We provide learning algorithms based on low-rank decompositions, and test them on a standard CF dataset. The experiments indicate the advantages of generalizing the existing regularization based CF methods to incorporate related information about users and objects. Finally, we show that certain multi-task learning methods can be also seen as special cases of our proposed approach.
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
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.
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 Hilbert-Schmidt norm allows effective use of optimization techniques such as convex optimization and semidefinite programming, is easy to manipulate analytically and numerically, has a straightforward geometric interpretation, and is independent from the choice of the Lie algebra Λ of SU(d) used to represent states as GBVs.
“The use of this norm has several benefits: It allows for the effective use of optimization techniques, such as convex optimization and semidefinite programming [69], it is easy to manipulate analytically and numerically, it has a straightforward geometric interpretation, and it is independent from the choice of the Lie algebra Λ of SU (d) used to represent states as GBVs.”
From Tight, robust, and feasible quantum speed limits for open dynamics (2019) · cites this paper as [69]
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 28 · Cited by 210
- Authors
- Abernethy, J., Bach, F., Evgeniou, T., & Vert, J.-P.
- Affiliations
- Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies du numérique (FR)
- INSEAD (FR)
- Centre de Bio-Informatique (FR)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2008
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 0802.1430
- OpenAlex
- W2116413942
- Cited by
- 210
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 16
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Sparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
- Keywords
- collaborative filtering, spectral regularization, matrix completion, low-rank decomposition, representer theorem, multi-task learning, recommender systems
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
