MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408930227 · doi:10.1145/3726864

Enhancing Sequential Personalized Product Search with External Out-of-sequence Knowledge

2025· article· en· W4408930227 on OpenAlexaff
Jiongnan Liu, Zhicheng Dou, Jian‐Yun Nie, Zhen-Lin Chen, Guoyu Tang, Sulong Xu, Ji-Rong Wen

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Information Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôtel-Dieu de Montréal
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSequence (biology)Product (mathematics)Computer scienceInformation retrievalComputational biologyMathematicsBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key challenge in personalized product search is to capture user’s preferences. Recent work attempted to model sequences of user historical behaviors, i.e., product purchase histories, to build user profiles and to personalize results accordingly. Although these approaches have demonstrated promising retrieval performances, we notice that most of them focus solely on the intra-sequence interactions between items. However, as there is usually a small amount of historical behavior data, the user profiles learned by these approaches could be very sensitive to the noise included in it. To tackle this problem, we propose incorporating out-of-sequence external information to enhance user modeling. More specifically, we inject the external item–item relations (e.g., belonging to the same brand), and query–query relations (e.g., the semantic similarities between them), into the intra-sequence interaction to learn better user profiles. In addition, we devise two auxiliary decoders, with the historical item sequence reconstruction task and the global item similarity prediction task, to further improve the reliability of user modeling. Experimental results on two datasets from simulated and real user search logs respectively show that the proposed personalized product search method outperforms existing 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.314
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Information SystemsSame topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207