Analyzing Data Augmentation Techniques for Contrastive Learning in Recommender Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the application of contrastive learning-based user and item representation learning in recommendation systems. A recommendation model combining contrastive loss with data augmentation strategies is proposed. Traditional recommendation systems typically rely on explicit or implicit feedback to model the relationships between users and items. However, traditional methods often show limited performance when dealing with issues such as data sparsity and cold start. To address this, the paper introduces a contrastive learning framework. By constructing positive and negative sample pairs, the model is guided to learn more discriminative representations. Various data augmentation methods are also applied to enhance the robustness and generalization capability of representation learning. Specifically, the paper compares different data augmentation strategies, including subsampling views, feature masking, and behavioral perturbation, and analyzes their performance under different temperature parameters and sparsity conditions. The experimental results show that the contrastive learning-based model effectively improves recommendation accuracy, particularly in addressing sparse data and cold start problems. Additionally, the paper explores the performance differences of the contrastive loss function under different training settings, validating the significant impact of appropriate hyperparameter tuning on recommendation system performance. By combining contrastive learning with data augmentation, this study provides a new perspective and significantly enhances the performance of recommendation systems in complex scenarios. The research offers both theoretical support and practical guidance for the future development of personalized recommendation technologies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".