MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409149434 · doi:10.1145/3690624.3709390

Scenario Shared Instance Modeling for Click-through Rate Prediction

2025· article· en· W4409149434 on OpenAlexaff
Dugang Liu, Chaohua Yang, Yuwen Fu, Xing Tang, Gongfu Li, Fuyuan Lyu, Xiuqiang He, Zhong Ming

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceClick-through rateWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-scenario recommendation (MSR) is a popular training paradigm in industrial platforms for uniformly integrating information from multiple scenarios and serving them simultaneously. A key challenge in MSR research is accurately identifying the commonalities and distinctive information between scenarios. Currently, most existing MSR methods focus on implicitly extracting this information from the architectural level. However, this continues to increase the complexity and training overhead of MSR. Furthermore, the custom components responsible for extracting implicit information in each MSR method are too dependent on the specific MSR architecture and are not easily reused in other methods. Given these challenges, we first show in a motivating experiment that it may be beneficial to explicitly select a reasonable set of shared instances that can affect parameter optimization in all scenarios during the training of MSR, i.e., to explicitly obtain the critical information required for MSR from the data level. Then, this paper proposes SSIM with an adaptive selection network. Specifically, SSIM can be integrated with existing MSR methods in a lightweight way to adaptively select an informative and shareable subset of instances from each scenario to improve recommendations. In particular, the selected multi-scenario shared subset has extraordinary reusability and can be easily saved to benefit model training of various future MSR models. Finally, we evaluate SSIM and demonstrate its effectiveness through experiments on two public multi-scenario benchmarks and an online A/B test.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207