CoSam: An Efficient Collaborative Adaptive Sampler for Recommendation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sampling strategies have been widely applied in many recommendation systems to accelerate model learning from implicit feedback data. A typical strategy is to draw negative instances with uniform distribution, which, however, will severely affect a model’s convergence, stability, and even recommendation accuracy. A promising solution for this problem is to over-sample the “difficult” (a.k.a. informative) instances that contribute more on training. But this will increase the risk of biasing the model and leading to non-optimal results. Moreover, existing samplers are either heuristic, which require domain knowledge and often fail to capture real “difficult” instances, or rely on a sampler model that suffers from low efficiency. To deal with these problems, we propose CoSam, an efficient and effective collaborative sampling method that consists of (1) a collaborative sampler model that explicitly leverages user-item interaction information in sampling probability and exhibits good properties of normalization, adaption, interaction information awareness, and sampling efficiency, and (2) an integrated sampler-recommender framework, leveraging the sampler model in prediction to offset the bias caused by uneven sampling. Correspondingly, we derive a fast reinforced training algorithm of our framework to boost the sampler performance and sampler-recommender collaboration. Extensive experiments on four real-world datasets demonstrate the superiority of the proposed collaborative sampler model and integrated sampler-recommender framework.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".