MCL: Mixed-Centric Loss for Collaborative Filtering
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of recent work in latent Collaborative Filtering (CF) has focused on developing new model architectures to learn accurate user and item representations. Typically, a standard pairwise loss function (BPR, Triplet, etc.) is used in these models, and little exploration is done on how to optimally extract signals from the available preference information. In the implicit setting, negative examples are sampled, and these losses allocate weights that solely depend on the difference in user distance between observed (positive) and negative item pairs. This can ignore valuable global information from other users and items, and lead to sub-optimal results. Motivated by this problem, we propose a novel loss which first leverages mining to select the most informative pairs, followed by a weighing process to allocate more weight to harder examples. Our weighting process consists of four different components, and incorporates distance information from other users, enabling the model to better position the learned representations. We conduct extensive experiments and demonstrate that our loss can be applied to different types of CF models leading to significant gains with each type. In particular, by applying our loss to the graph convolutional architecture, we achieve new state-of-the-art results on four different datasets. Further analysis shows that through our loss the model is able to learn better user-item representation space compared to other losses. Full code for this work is available here: https://github.com/layer6ai-labs/MCL.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| 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 it