DeepGroup: Group Recommendation with Implicit Feedback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We focus on making recommendations for a new group of users whose preferences are unknown, but we are given the decisions of other groups. By formulating this problem as group recommendation from group implicit feedback, we focus on two of its practical instances: group decision prediction and reverse social choice. Given a set of groups and their observed decisions, group decision prediction intends to predict the decision of a new group of users, whereas reverse social choice aims to infer the preferences of those users involved in observed group decisions. These two problems are of interest to not only group recommendation, but also to personal privacy when the users intend to conceal their personal preferences but have participated in group decisions. To tackle these two problems, we propose and study DeepGroup---a deep learning approach for group recommendation with group implicit data. We empirically assess the predictive power of DeepGroup on various real-world datasets and group decision rules. Our extensive experiments not only demonstrate the efficacy of DeepGroup but also shed light on the privacy-leakage concerns of some decision-making processes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.044 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".