MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385567607 · doi:10.1145/3580305.3599838

Hierarchical Projection Enhanced Multi-behavior Recommendation

2023· article· en· W4385567607 on OpenAlexaff
Chang Meng, Hengyu Zhang, Wei Guo, Huifeng Guo, Haotian Liu, Yingxue Zhang, Hongkun Zheng, Ruiming Tang, Xiu Li, Rui Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWeightingDownstream (manufacturing)Projection (relational algebra)Task (project management)Transfer of learningMachine learningCode (set theory)Data miningArtificial intelligenceSource codeUpstream (networking)Information transferAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various types of user behaviors are recorded in most real-world recommendation scenarios. To fully utilize the multi-behavior information, the exploration of multiplex interaction among them is essential. Many multi-task learning based multi-behavior methods are proposed recently to use multiple types of supervision signals and perform information transfer among them. Despite the great successes, these methods fail to design prediction tasks comprehensively, leading to insufficient utilization of multi-behavior correlative information. Besides, these methods are either based on the weighting of expert information extracted from the coupled input or modeling of information transfer between multiple behavior levels through task-specific extractors, which are usually accompanied by negative transfer phenomenon1. To address the above problems, we propose a multi-behavior recommendation framework, called Hierarchical Projection Enhanced Multi-behavior Recommendation (HPMR). The key module, Projection-based Transfer Network (PTN), uses the projection mechanism to "explicitly" model the correlations of upstream and downstream behaviors, refines the upstream behavior representations, and fully uses the refined representations to enhance the learning of downstream tasks. Offline experiments on public and industrial datasets and online A/B test further verify the effectiveness of HPMR in modeling the associations from upstream to downstream and alleviating the negative transfer. The source code and datasets are available at https://github.com/MC-CV/HPMR.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations42
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207