Harnessing Light for Cold-Start Recommendations: Leveraging Epistemic Uncertainty to Enhance Performance in User-Item Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most recent paradigms of generative model-based recommendation still face challenges related to the cold-start problem. Existing models addressing cold item recommendations mainly focus on acquiring more knowledge to enrich embeddings or model inputs. However, many models do not assess the efficiency with which they utilize the available training knowledge, leading to the extraction of significant knowledge that is not fully used, thus limiting improvements in cold-start performance. To address this, we introduce the concept of epistemic uncertainty (which refers to uncertainty caused by a lack of knowledge of the best model) to indirectly define how efficiently a model uses the training knowledge. Since epistemic uncertainty represents the reducible part of the total uncertainty, we can optimize the recommendation model further based on epistemic uncertainty to improve its performance. To this end, we propose a Cold-Start Recommendation based on Epistemic Uncertainty (CREU) framework. Additionally, CREU is inspired by Pairwise-Distance Estimators (PaiDEs) to efficiently and accurately measure epistemic uncertainty by evaluating the mutual information between model outputs and weights in high-dimensional spaces. The proposed method is evaluated through extensive offline experiments on public datasets, which further demonstrate the advantages and robustness of CREU. The source code is available at https://github.com/EsiksonX/CREU.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".