MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7134922341 · doi:10.1109/icdmw69685.2025.00284

Aspect-Aware Sentiment Interaction Modeling with DeBERTa for Enhanced Review-Based Recommendations

2025· article· W7134922341 on OpenAlexaff
Sepinood Haghighi, Pooya Moradian Zadeh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Identification (biology)Feature (linguistics)Key (lock)Focus (optics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, recommender systems play a very important role in our daily lives and in influencing decision-making processes. They serve as key tools for mitigating information overload across many platforms. Their ability to narrow down options based on individual preferences not only helps users by saving time and effort but also enables many businesses to boost user engagement. However, despite substantial progress in recent years, there remains great potential to further enhance performance by leveraging aspect-level sentiment signals embedded in user reviews. In this paper, we propose a novel aspect-sentiment-aware recommender system that incorporates both explicit and implicit interaction modeling between user and item aspect-level sentiment profiles. These profiles are built using Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attention (DeBERTa) to extract fine-grained sentiment information across domain-specific aspects, enabling the model to capture user preferences from past reviews and item attributes from collective feedback. Experiments on benchmark datasets show that our model outperforms several state-of-the-art review-based recommender systems.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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 topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207