MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160476942 · doi:10.1504/ijcnds.2008.020261

Adaptive collaborative filtering based on user-genre-item relation

2008· article· en· W2160476942 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Communication Networks and Distributed Systems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollaborative filteringMovieLensComputer scienceSimilarity (geometry)Relevance (law)Relation (database)Information retrievalRecommender systemPreferenceComponent (thermodynamics)Artificial intelligenceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collaborative filtering provides personalised recommendations based on individual user preferences as well as those of other users with similar interests. In collaborative filtering, memory-based approaches make predictions by measuring the whole similarity between two users. When a user has multiple interest genres, those methods seem too optimistic in making correct predictions in some situations. In addition, minor genres are often inhibited due to their minute share of the whole similarity. In this paper, we present a novel approach that combines the advantages of item-item similarity and user-user similarity by introducing a genre component to the relation between user and item. In our approach, the direct user-item relevance is developed into a combination of genre similarity and preference similarity, thus capturing more accurately the relevance between items as well as between user and item. Experimental results from EachMovie and MovieLens datasets show that our approach outperforms four other state-of-the-art collaborative filtering algorithms.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.235 · 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