MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Graph Neural Network Session Recommendation Algorithm Based on Semantic Knowledge and Temporal Encoding

2022· article· en· W4385325564 on OpenAlexaff
Huihui Chai, Xuesong Jiang, Xiumei Wei, Yihong Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSession (web analytics)GraphENCODEEncoding (memory)Artificial intelligenceInformation retrievalTheoretical computer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Session-based recommendation aims to match users with corresponding resources, and has been widely used in streaming media, e-commerce and so on. At present, the most widely used session-based graph neural network recommendation model is to construct a session sequence into a session graph as the input of the graph neural network, and use the target attention network to capture the specific user interests associated with the target item, and use the self-attention mechanism to obtain the long-term interest preferences of the user. Although this model has achieved good results, it also has some limitations. (1) It only constructs the session sequence into a session graph, resulting in a single form of constructing the session graph. (2) It is too one-sided to recommend users only according to their session behavior. In order to solve the above problems, this paper proposes a new recommendation algorithm -Graph Neural Network Recommendation Algorithm (KT-GNN) based on semantic knowledge and temporal encoding. First, we introduce dwell time to the session graph and encode the dwell time to solve the session graph single problem. At the same time, the dwell time can reflect the user’s preference for the item and improve the efficiency of recommendation. Second, PairRE knowledge translation model is used to process users’ semantic knowledge and mine users’ semantic preferences. Extensive experiments have demonstrated the superiority of our model on both Yoochoose and TFCD datasets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207