MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113415574 · doi:10.1109/icmla.2008.121

Does Wikipedia Information Help Netflix Predictions?

2008· article· en· W2113415574 on OpenAlexaff
John Lees-Miller, Fraser Anderson, Bret Hoehn, Russell Greiner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperlinkEncyclopediaComputer scienceSimilarity (geometry)Information retrievalRecommender systemMatrix decompositionk-nearest neighbors algorithmConjunction (astronomy)Empirical researchWorld Wide WebData miningArtificial intelligenceWeb pageMathematicsImage (mathematics)Statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore several ways to estimate movie similarity from the free encyclopedia Wikipedia with the goal of im-proving our predictions for the Netflix Prize. Our system first uses the content and hyperlink structure of Wikipedia articles to identify similarities between movies. We then predict a user’s unknown ratings by using these similarities in conjunction with the user’s known ratings to initialize matrix factorization and k-Nearest Neighbours algorithms. We blend these results with existing ratings-based predic-tors. Finally, we discuss our empirical results, which sug-gest that external Wikipedia data does not significantly im-prove the overall prediction accuracy. 1

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207