Maritza L. Calderón-Benavides
ABSTRACT
The basic objective of a predictive algorithm for collaborative filtering (CF) is to suggest items to a particular user based on his/her preferences and other users with similar interests. Many algorithms have been proposed for CF, and some works comparing sub-sets of them can be found in the literature; however, more comprehensive comparisons are not available. In this work, a meaningful sample of CF algorithms widely reported in the literature were chosen for analysis; they represent different stages in the evolutive process of CF, starting from simple user correlations, going through online learning, up to methods which use classification techniques. Our main purpose is to compare these algorithms when applied on multi-valued ratings.Experiments were conducted on three well-known datasets with different characteristics, using two protocols and four evaluation metrics, representing coverage, accuracy, reliability and agreement of predictions with respect to real values. Results from such experiments showed that the memory-based method is a good option because its results are more precise and reliable compared with the other methods. Online Learning methods exhibit a good level of accuracy with low variation, which makes them reliable models. On the other hand, Support Vector Machines generate predictions with acceptable agreement; however, their accuracy depends on the characteristics of the input data. Finally, Dependency Networks did not offer good results when applied on multi-valued rankings. The run experiments confirm that the characteristics of datasets keep being an important factor in the performance of methods.
- E. L. Allwein, R. E. Schapire, and Y. Singer. Reducing multiclass to binary: A unifying approach for margin classifiers. In Proc. 17th International Conf. on Machine Learning, pages 9--16. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 2000. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- C. Basu, H. Hirsh, and W. Cohen. Recommendation as classification: Using social content-based information in recommendation. In Proceedings of the 15th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 714--720, 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Billsus and M. Pazzani. Learning collaborative information filters. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 43--52, 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. S. Breese, D. Heckerman, and C. Kadie. Empirical analysis of predictive algorithms for collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Madison, WI, pages 43--52. Morgan Kaufman Eds., 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Burgues. A tutorial on Support Vector Machines for Pattern Recognition. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. M. Chickering. The winmine toolkit. Technical Report MSR-TR-2002-103, Microsoft, Redmond, WA, 2002.Google Scholar
- J. Cohen. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Journal of Educational and Psychological Measurement, 2(22):249--254, 1960.Google Scholar
- D. Cosley, S. Lawrence, and D. M. Pennock. REFEREE: An open framework for practical testing of recommender systems using researchindex. In 28th International Conference on Very Large Databases, VLDB 2002, Hong Kong, August 20--23 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Delgado and N. Ishii. Memory-based weighted-majority prediction for recommender systems. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR-99, Recommender Systems Workshop, August 1999, UC Berkeley, pages 1--5, 1999.Google Scholar
- T. G. Dietterich and G. Bakiri. Solving multiclass learning problems via error-correcting output codes. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 2:263--286, 1995. Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Fisher, K. Hildrum, J. Hong, M. Newman, M. Thomas, and R. Vuduc. Swami (poster session): a framework for collaborative filtering algorithm development and evaluation. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International ACM SIGIR, 2000, Athens, Greece, pages 366 -- 368. ACM, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Goldberg, T. Roeder, D. Gupta, and C. Perkins. Eigentaste: A constant time collaborative filtering algorithm. Technical report m00/41., University of California, Berkeley, 2000.Google Scholar
- C. Gonzalez-Caro, M. Calderon-Benavides, J. Perez-Alcazar, J. Garcia-Diaz, and J. Delgado. Towards a more comprehensive comparison of collaborative filtering algorithms. In In Proceedings of the ninth edition of the International Symposium on String Processing and Information Retrieval, pages 248--253, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Heckerman, D. Chickering, C. Meek, R. Rounthwaite, and C. Kadie. Dependency networks for inference, collaborative filtering and data visualization. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 1:49--75, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. L. Herlocker, J. A. Konstan, A. Borchers, and J. Riedl. An algorithmic framework for performing collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International ACM SIGIR, August 15--19, 1999, Berkeley, CA, USA, pages 230--237. ACM, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. McJonese. Eachmovie collaborative filtering data set. DEC Systems Research Center., 1997.Google Scholar
- A. Nakamura and N. Abe. Collaborative filtering using weighted majority prediction algorithms. In Proceedings of ICML98, pages 395--403. Morgan Kaufman Eds., 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Pazzani and D. Billsus. Learning and revising user profiles: The identification of interesting web sites. Machine Learning, 27:313--331, 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Rashid, I. Albert, D. Cosley, S. Lam, S. McNee, J. Konstan, and J. Rield. Getting to know you: Learning new user preferences in recommender systems. In Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI-02), pages 127--134, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Resnick, N. Iacovou, M. Suchak, P. Bergstorm, and J. Riedl. GroupLens: An Open Architecture for Collaborative Filtering of Netnews. In Proceedings of ACM 1994 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pages 175--186, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 1994. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. B. Schafer, J. A. Konstan, and J. Riedi. Recommender systems in e-commerce. In ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pages 158--166, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Vapnik. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. Springer, NY, 1995. Google ScholarDigital Library
- I. Witten and E. Frank. Data Mining, Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques with Java Implementations. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- A comparison of several predictive algorithms for collaborative filtering on multi-valued ratings
Recommendations
Distributed collaborative filtering with singular ratings for large scale recommendation
Collaborative filtering (CF) is an effective technique addressing the information overloading problem, where each user is associated with a set of rating scores on a set of items. For a chosen target user, conventional CF algorithms measure similarity ...
Context-based splitting of item ratings in collaborative filtering
RecSys '09: Proceedings of the third ACM conference on Recommender systemsCollaborative Filtering (CF) recommendations are computed by leveraging a historical data set of users' ratings for items. It assumes that the users' previously recorded ratings can help in predicting future ratings. This has been validated extensively, ...
A hybrid approach for improving predictive accuracy of collaborative filtering algorithms
Recommender systems represent a class of personalized systems that aim at predicting a user's interest on information items available in the application domain, operating upon user-driven ratings on items and/or item features. One of the most widely ...
Comments