MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792883393 · doi:10.5539/cis.v11n2p1

Matrix Factorization Techniques for Context-Aware Collaborative Filtering Recommender Systems: A Survey

2018· article· en· W2792883393 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Hussein Abdi, George Okeyo, Ronald Waweru Mwangi

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecommender systemCollaborative filteringComputer scienceMatrix decompositionInformation overloadContext (archaeology)PersonalizationScalabilityInformation retrievalPreferenceQuality (philosophy)Data miningWorld Wide WebDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collaborative Filtering Recommender Systems predict user preferences for online information, products or services by learning from past user-item relationships. A predominant approach to Collaborative Filtering is Neighborhood-based, where a user-item preference rating is computed from ratings of similar items and/or users. This approach encounters data sparsity and scalability limitations as the volume of accessible information and the active users continue to grow leading to performance degradation, poor quality recommendations and inaccurate predictions. Despite these drawbacks, the problem of information overload has led to great interests in personalization techniques. The incorporation of context information and Matrix and Tensor Factorization techniques have proved to be a promising solution to some of these challenges. We conducted a focused review of literature in the areas of Context-aware Recommender Systems utilizing Matrix Factorization approaches. This survey paper presents a detailed literature review of Context-aware Recommender Systems and approaches to improving performance for large scale datasets and the impact of incorporating contextual information on the quality and accuracy of the recommendation. The results of this survey can be used as a basic reference for improving and optimizing existing Context-aware Collaborative Filtering based Recommender Systems. The main contribution of this paper is a survey of Matrix Factorization techniques for Context-aware Collaborative Filtering Recommender Systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations63
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer and Information ScienceSame topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207