MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401863720 · doi:10.1145/3637528.3671733

Probabilistic Attention for Sequential Recommendation

2024· article· en· W4401863720 on OpenAlexaff
Y. B. Liu, Christian Walder, Lexing Xie, Yiqun Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsGoogle (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sequential Recommendation (SR) navigates users' dynamic preferences through modeling their historical interactions. The incorporation of the popular Transformer framework, which captures long relationships through pairwise dot products, has notably benefited SR. However, prevailing research in this domain faces three significant challenges: (i) Existing studies directly adopt the primary component of Transformer (i.e., the self-attention mechanism), without a clear explanation or tailored definition for its specific role in SR; (ii) The predominant focus on pairwise computations overlooks the global context or relative prevalence of item pairs within the overall sequence; (iii) Transformer primarily pursues relevance-dominated relationships, neglecting another essential objective in recommendation, i.e., diversity. In response, this work introduces a fresh perspective to elucidate the attention mechanism in SR. Here, attention is defined as dependency interactions among items, quantitatively determined under a global probabilistic model by observing the probabilities of corresponding item subsets. This viewpoint offers a precise and context-specific definition of attention, leading to the design of a distinctive attention mechanism tailored for SR. Specifically, we transmute the well-formulated global, repulsive interactions in Determinantal Point Processes (DPPs) to effectively model dependency interactions. Guided by the repulsive interactions, a theoretically and practically feasible DPP kernel is designed, enabling our attention mechanism to directly consider category/topic distribution for enhancing diversity. Consequently, the <u>P</u>robabilistic <u>Att</u>ention mechanism (PAtt) for sequential recommendation is developed. Experimental results demonstrate the excellent scalability and adaptability of our attention mechanism, which significantly improves recommendation performance in terms of both relevance and diversity.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207