skip to main content
10.1145/1557019.1557072acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Collaborative filtering with temporal dynamics

Published:28 June 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

Customer preferences for products are drifting over time. Product perception and popularity are constantly changing as new selection emerges. Similarly, customer inclinations are evolving, leading them to ever redefine their taste. Thus, modeling temporal dynamics should be a key when designing recommender systems or general customer preference models. However, this raises unique challenges. Within the eco-system intersecting multiple products and customers, many different characteristics are shifting simultaneously, while many of them influence each other and often those shifts are delicate and associated with a few data instances. This distinguishes the problem from concept drift explorations, where mostly a single concept is tracked. Classical time-window or instance-decay approaches cannot work, as they lose too much signal when discarding data instances. A more sensitive approach is required, which can make better distinctions between transient effects and long term patterns. The paradigm we offer is creating a model tracking the time changing behavior throughout the life span of the data. This allows us to exploit the relevant components of all data instances, while discarding only what is modeled as being irrelevant. Accordingly, we revamp two leading collaborative filtering recommendation approaches. Evaluation is made on a large movie rating dataset by Netflix. Results are encouraging and better than those previously reported on this dataset.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

p447-koren.mp4

mp4

142.9 MB

References

  1. R. Bell and Y. Koren. Scalable collaborative filtering with jointly derived neighborhood interpolation weights. IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM'07), pp. 43--52, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. R. M. Bell, Y. Koren and C. Volinsky. Modelingrelationships at multiple scales to improve accuracy of largerecommender systems. Proc. 13th ACM SIGKDD InternationalConference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD'07), pp. 95--104, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J. Bennett, C. Elkan, B. Liu, P. Smyth and D. Tikk (eds.). KDD Cup and Workshop in conjunction with KDD'07, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. J. Bennet and S. Lanning. The Netflix Prize. KDD Cup and Workshop, 2007. www.netflixprize.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. J. Canny. Collaborative filtering with privacy via factoranalysis. Proc. 25th ACM SIGIR Conf. on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR'02), pp. 238--245, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Y. Ding and X. Li. Time weight collaborative filtering. Proc. 14th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management (CIKM'04), pp. 485--492, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. Z. Kolter and M. A. Maloof. Dynamic weighted majority: A new ensemble method for tracking concept drift. Proc. IEEE Conf. on Data Mining (ICDM'03), pp. 123--130, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Y. Koren. Factorization meets the neighborhood: a multifaceted collaborative filtering model. Proc. 14th ACM SIGKDD Int.Conf. on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD'08), pp. 426--434, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. G. Linden, B. Smith and J. York. Amazon.com recommendations: Item-to-item collaborative filtering. IEEE Internet Computing, 7:76--80, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. A. Paterek. Improving regularized singular value decomposition for collaborative filtering. Proc. KDD Cup and Workshop, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. G. Potter. Putting the collaborator back into collaborative filtering. KDD'08 Workshop on Large Scale Recommenders Systems and the Netflix Prize, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. P. Pu, D. G. Bridge, B. Mobasher and F. Ricci (eds.). Proc. 2008 ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. R. Salakhutdinov, A. Mnih and G. Hinton. RestrictedBoltzmann Machines for collaborative filtering. Proc. 24th AnnualInternational Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 791--798, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. B. Sarwar, G. Karypis, J. Konstan and J. Riedl. Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. Proc. 10th International Conference on the World Wide Web, pp. 285--295, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. J. Schlimmer and R. Granger. Beyond incremental processing: Tracking concept drift. Proc. 5th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 502--507, 1986.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. W. N. Street and Y. Kim. A streaming ensemble algorithm (SEA) for large-scale classification. Proc. 7th ACM SIGKDD InternationalConference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD'01), pp. 377--382, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. K. Sugiyama, K. Hatano and M. Yoshikawa. Adaptive web search based on user profile constructed without any effort from users. Proc. 13th international conference on World Wide Web (WWW'04), pp. 675--684, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. G. Takacs, I. Pilaszy, B. Nemeth and D. Tikk. Major components of the gravity recommendation aystem. SIGKDD Explorations, 9:80--84, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. G. Takacs, I. Pilaszy, B. Nemeth and D. Tikk. Matrix factorization and neighbor based algorithms for the Netflix Prize problem. Proc. 2008 ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (RECSYS'08), pp. 267--274, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. C. Thompson. If you liked this, you're sure to love that. The New York Times, Nov 21, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. A. Toscher, M. Jahrer and R. Legenstein. Improved neighborhood-based algorithms for large-scale recommender systems. KDD'08 Workshop on Large Scale Recommenders Systems and the Netflix Prize, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. A. Tsymbal. The problem of concept drift: Definitions and related work. Technical Report TCD-CS-2004-15, Trinity College Dublin, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. A. Tuzhilin, Y. Koren, J. Bennett, C. Elkan and D. Lemire (eds.). Workshop on large scale recommender systems and the Netflix Prize in conjunction with KDD'08, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. H. Wang, W. Fan, P. S. Yu, and J. Han. Mining concept driftingdata streams using ensemble classifiers. Proc. 9th ACM SIGKDD InternationalConference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD'03), pp. 226--235, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. G. Widmer and M. Kubat. Learning in the presence of concept drift and hidden contexts. Machine Learning, 23:69--101, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Collaborative filtering with temporal dynamics

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      KDD '09: Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
      June 2009
      1426 pages
      ISBN:9781605584959
      DOI:10.1145/1557019

      Copyright © 2009 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 28 June 2009

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate1,133of8,635submissions,13%

      Upcoming Conference

      KDD '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader