The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
A Survey on Large Language Models for Recommendation
Open accessAbstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP) and have recently gained significant attention in the domain of Recommendation Systems (RS). These models, trained on massive amounts of data using self-supervised learning, have demonstrated remarkable success in learning universal representations and have the potential to enhance various aspects of recommendation systems by some effective transfer techniques such as fine-tuning and prompt tuning, and so on. The crucial aspect of harnessing the power of language models in enhancing recommendation quality is the utilization of their high-quality representations of textual features and their extensive coverage of external knowledge to establish correlations between items and users. To provide a comprehensive understanding of the existing LLM-based recommendation systems, this survey presents a taxonomy that categorizes these models into two major paradigms, respectively Discriminative LLM for Recommendation (DLLM4Rec) and Generative LLM for Recommendation (GLLM4Rec), with the latter being systematically sorted out for the first time. Furthermore, we systematically review and analyze existing LLM-based recommendation systems within each paradigm, providing insights into their methodologies, techniques, and performance. Additionally, we identify key challenges and several valuable findings to provide researchers and practitioners with inspiration. We have also created a GitHub repository to index relevant papers on LLMs for recommendation, https://github.com/WLiK/LLM4Rec.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
AI long-term memory can enhance various domains such as content personalization and motion control.
“Beyond the two applications aforementioned, AI long-term memory can also enhance various domains such as content personalization (e.g. recommender systems [332, 258, 333]) and motion control (e.g. robotics [334, 335, 336]).”
From Human-inspired Perspectives: A Survey on AI Long-term Memory (2024) · cites this paper as [333]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 110 · Cited by 515
Metadata
- Authors
- Wu, L., Zheng, Z., Qiu, Z., Wang, H., Gu, H., Shen, T., Qin, C., Zhu, C., Zhu, H., Liu, Q., Xiong, H., & Chen, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
- The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou) (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Wang, Hao
- Zhu, Chen
- Zhu, Hengshu
- Xiong, Hui
- Chen, Enhong
- ORCID
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 5
- ISSN
- 1386-145X (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2305.19860
- OpenAlex
- W4401834466
- Cited by
- 515
- References
- 110
- Citations by year
- 2026: 235 · 2025: 215 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 7
- FWCI
- 190.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- World Wide Web (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- large language models, recommender systems, LLM-based recommendation, fine-tuning, prompt tuning, knowledge transfer
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