Attentive Autoencoders for Multifaceted Preference Learning in One-class Collaborative Filtering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most existing One-Class Collaborative Filtering (OC-CF) algorithms estimate a user's preference as a latent vector by encoding their historical interactions. However, users often show diverse interests, which significantly increases the learning difficulty. In order to capture multifaceted user preferences, existing recommender systems either increase the encoding complexity or extend the latent representation dimension. Unfortunately, these changes inevitably lead to increased training difficulty and exacerbate scalability issues. In this paper, we propose a novel and efficient CF framework called Attentive Multimodal AutoRec (AMA) that explicitly tracks multiple facets of user preferences. Specifically, we extend the Autoencoding-based recommender AutoRec to learn user preferences with multimodal latent representations, where each mode captures one facet of a user's preferences. By leveraging the attention mechanism, each observed interaction can have different contributions to the preference facets. Through extensive experiments on three realworld datasets, we show that AMA is competitive with state-of-the-art models under the OC-CF setting. Also, we demonstrate how the proposed model improves interpretability by providing explanations using the attention mechanism.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".