Meta-Learning for Online Update of Recommender Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Online recommender systems should be always aligned with users' current interest to accurately suggest items that each user would like. Since user interest usually evolves over time, the update strategy should be flexible to quickly catch users' current interest from continuously generated new user-item interactions. Existing update strategies focus either on the importance of each user-item interaction or the learning rate for each recommender parameter, but such one-directional flexibility is insufficient to adapt to varying relationships between interactions and parameters. In this paper, we propose MeLON, a meta-learning based novel online recommender update strategy that supports two-directional flexibility. It is featured with an adaptive learning rate for each parameter-interaction pair for inducing a recommender to quickly learn users' up-to-date interest. The procedure of MeLON is optimized following a meta-learning approach: it learns how a recommender learns to generate the optimal learning rates for future updates. Specifically, MeLON first enriches the meaning of each interaction based on previous interactions and identifies the role of each parameter for the interaction; and then combines these two pieces of information to generate an adaptive learning rate. Theoretical analysis and extensive evaluation on three real-world online recommender datasets validate the effectiveness of MeLON.
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 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".