MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392942933 · doi:10.1109/icmla58977.2023.00095

XLNet4Rec: Recommendations Based on Users' Long-Term and Short-Term Interests Using Transformer

2023· article· en· W4392942933 on OpenAlexaff
Namarta Vij, Aznam Yacoub, Ziad Kobti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerm (time)Computer scienceTransformerElectrical engineeringEngineeringVoltagePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of understanding temporal dynamics in accurate recommendation systems is widely acknowledged. Sequential recommendation systems can efficiently model the dynamics of users and items over the period of time. Therefore, considering long-term and short-term interests of the user is essential for accurate recommendation. However, existing models considered users' long-term and short-term behavioural patterns, but ignore the side information, which plays an important role in improving the performance of the recommendations. As user behaviors contain a lot of information, such as consumption habits and dynamic preferences. In order to better locate user interests, our model called XLNet4Rec, considers the side information (additional features) along with IDs as inputs. Apart from this, unidirectional architectures such as GRU, LSTM restrict the power of hidden representation of users' behavior sequences and they follow the rigid ordered sequence, which is not always true in real world applications. Therefore, we used Transformers4rec (end-to-end RecSys framework), which consists XLNet, a transformer based architecture, employs the deep bidirectional approach to model user behavior sequences and also efficient in processing multiple features. In this paper, we proposed a recommendation system based on users' long-term and short-term interest using XLNet to predict the next user item interaction. Our model improves the quality and personalization of item recommendations for users. In this paper, we conducted experiments on two real-world datasets: Movielens and REES46. Empirical results show that our proposed model is more effective in recommending relevant items to the user compared to previous approaches.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207