Deep Sequential Recommendation for Personalized Adaptive User Interfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptive user-interfaces (AUIs) can enhance the usability of complex software by providing real-time contextual adaptation and assistance. Ideally, AUIs should be personalized and versatile, i.e., able to adapt to each user who may perform a variety of complex tasks. But this is difficult to achieve with many interaction elements when data-per-user is sparse. In this paper, we propose an architecture for personalized AUIs that leverages upon developments in (1) deep learning, particularly gated recurrent units, to efficiently learn user interaction patterns, (2) collaborative filtering techniques that enable sharing of data among users, and (3) fast approximate nearest-neighbor methods in Euclidean spaces for quick UI control and/or content recommendations. Specifically, interaction histories are embedded in a learned space along with users and interaction elements; this allows the AUI to query and recommend likely next actions based on similar usage patterns across the user base. In a comparative evaluation on user-interface, web-browsing and e-learning datasets, the deep recurrent neural-network (DRNN) outperforms state-of-the-art tensor-factorization and metric embedding methods.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".