Movie Recommendation via Markovian Factorization of Matrix Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The success of the probabilistic matrix factorization (PMF) model has inspired the rapid development of collaborative filtering algorithms, among which timeSVD++ has demonstrated great performance advantage in solving the movie rating prediction problem. Allowing the model to evolve over time, timeSVD++ accounts for “concept drift” in collaborative filtering by heuristically modifying the quadratic optimization problem derived from the PMF model. As such, timeSVD++ no longer carries any probabilistic interpretation. This lack of frameworks makes the generalization of timeSVD++ to other collaborative filtering problems rather difficult. This paper presents a new model family termed Markovian factorization of matrix process (MFMP). On one hand, MFMP models, such as timeSVD++, are capable of capturing the temporal dynamics in the dataset, and on the other hand, they also have clean probabilistic formulations, allowing them to adapt to a wide spectrum of collaborative filtering problems. Two simple example models in this family are introduced for the prediction of movie ratings using time-stamped rating data. The experimental study using MovieLens dataset demonstrates that the two models, although simple and primitive, already have comparable or even better performance than timeSVD++ and a standard tensor factorization model.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".