Neural Interactive Collaborative Filtering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study collaborative filtering in an interactive setting, in which the recommender agents iterate between making recommendations and updating the user profile based on the interactive feedback. The most challenging problem in this scenario is how to suggest items when the user profile has not been well established, \ie recommend for cold-start users or warm-start users with taste drifting. Existing approaches either rely on overly pessimistic linear exploration strategy or adopt meta-learning based algorithms in a full exploitation way. In this work, to quickly catch up with the user's interests, we proposed to represent the exploration policy with a neural network and directly learn it from the feedback data. Specifically, the exploration policy is encoded in the weights of multi-channel stacked self-attention neural networks and trained with efficient Q-learning by maximizing users' overall satisfaction in the recommender systems. The key insight is that the satisfied recommendations triggered by the exploration recommendation can be viewed as the exploration bonus (delayed reward) for its contribution on improving the quality of the user profile. Therefore, the proposed exploration policy, to balance between learning the user profile and making accurate recommendations, can be directly optimized by maximizing users' long-term satisfaction with reinforcement learning. Extensive experiments and analysis conducted on three benchmark collaborative filtering datasets have demonstrated the advantage of our method over state-of-the-art 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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".