Recommender systems based on ranking performance optimization

Abstract

The rapid development of online services and information overload has inspired the fast development of recommender systems, among which collaborative filtering algorithms and model-based recommendation approaches are wildly exploited. For instance, matrix factorization (MF) demonstrated successful achievements and advantages in assisting internet users in finding interested information. These existing models focus on the prediction of the users’ ratings on unknown items. The performance is usually evaluated by the metric root mean square error (RMSE). However, achieving good performance in terms of RMSE does not always guarantee a good ranking performance. Therefore, in this paper, we advocate to treat the recommendation as a ranking problem. Normalized discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) is chosen as the optimization target when evaluating the ranking accuracy. Specifically, we present three ranking-oriented recommender algorithms, NSMF, AdaMF and AdaNSMF. NSMF builds a NDCG approximated loss function for Matrix Factorization. AdaMF is based on an algorithm by adaptively combining component MF recommenders with boosting method. To combine the advantages of both algorithms, we propose AdaNSMF, which is a hybird of NSMF and AdaMF, and show the superiority in both ranking accuracy and model generalization. In addition, we compare our proposed approaches with the state-of-the-art recommendation algorithms. The comparison studies confirm the advantage of our proposed approaches.

Keywords

recommender system / matrix factorization / learning to rank

References

[1] Goldberg D, Nichols D, Oki B M, Terry D. Using collaborative filtering to weave an information tapestry. Communications of the ACM, 1992, 35(12): 61–70

[2] Resnick P, Iacovou N, Suchak M, Bergstrom P, Riedl J. Grouplens: an open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews. In: Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 1994, 175–186

[3] Sarwar B M, Karypis G, Konstan J A, Reidl J. Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on World Wide Web. 2001, 285–295

[4] Koren Y, Bell R, Volinsky C. Matrix factorization techniques for recommender systems. Computer, 2009, 42(8): 30 –37

[5] Cremonesi P, Koren Y, Turrin R. Performance of recommender algorithms on top-n recommendation tasks. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. 2010, 39–46

[6] Liu T Y. Learning to rank for information retrieval. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, 2009, 3(3): 225–331

[7] Hacker S, Von Ahn L. Matchin: eliciting user preferences with an online game. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2009, 1207–1216

[8] Balakrishnan S, Chopra S. Collaborative ranking. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. 2012, 143–152

[9] Shi Y, Larson M, Hanjalic A. List-wise learning to rank with ma trix factorization for collaborative filtering. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. 2010, 269–272

[10] Xu J, Li H. Adarank: a boosting algorithm for information retrieval. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 2007, 391–398

[11] Wang Y, Sun H, Zhang R. Adamf: adaptive boosting matrix factorization for recommender system. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Web-Age Information Management. 2014, 43–54

[12] Valizadegan H, Jin R, Zhang R, Mao J. Learning to rank by optimizing ndcg measure. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 2009, 1883–1891

[13] Sarwar B, Karypis G, Konstan J, Riedl J. Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on World Wide Web. 2001, 285–295

[14] Guan Y, Cai S, Shang M S. Recommendation algorithm based on item quality and user rating preferences. Frontiers of Computer Science, 2014, 8(2): 289–297

[15] Koren Y. Factorization meets the neighborhood: a multifaceted collaborative filtering model. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 2008, 426–434

[16] Herbrich R, Graepel T, Obermayer K. Large margin rank boundaries for ordinal regression. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 1999: 115–132

[17] Chapelle O, Wu M. Gradient descent optimization of smoothed information retrieval metrics. Information Retrieval, 2010, 13(3): 216–235

[18] Baeza-Yates R, Ribeiro-Neto B. Modern information retrieval. New York: ACM press, 1999

[19] Voorhees E M. The TREC-8 question answering track report. In: Proceedings of TREC. 1999, 77–82

[20] Järvelin KKekäläinen J. IR evaluation methods for retrieving highly relevant documents. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International ACMSIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 2000, 41–48

[21] Chapelle O, Metlzer D, Zhang Y, Grinspan P. Expected reciprocal rank for graded relevance. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. 2009, 621–630

[22] Qin T, Liu T Y, Li H. A general approximation framework for direct optimization of information retrieval measures. Information Retrieval, 2010, 13(4): 375–397

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2014 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg