skip to main content
10.1145/1571941.1571978acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Learning to recommend with social trust ensemble

Authors Info & Claims
Published:19 July 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

As an indispensable technique in the field of Information Filtering, Recommender System has been well studied and developed both in academia and in industry recently. However, most of current recommender systems suffer the following problems: (1) The large-scale and sparse data of the user-item matrix seriously affect the recommendation quality. As a result, most of the recommender systems cannot easily deal with users who have made very few ratings. (2) The traditional recommender systems assume that all the users are independent and identically distributed; this assumption ignores the connections among users, which is not consistent with the real world recommendations. Aiming at modeling recommender systems more accurately and realistically, we propose a novel probabilistic factor analysis framework, which naturally fuses the users' tastes and their trusted friends' favors together. In this framework, we coin the term Social Trust Ensemble to represent the formulation of the social trust restrictions on the recommender systems. The complexity analysis indicates that our approach can be applied to very large datasets since it scales linearly with the number of observations, while the experimental results show that our method performs better than the state-of-the-art approaches.

References

  1. R. Andersen, C. Borgs, J. Chayes, U. Feige, A. Flaxman, A. Kalai, V. Mirrokni, and M. Tennenholtz. Trust-based recommendation systems: an axiomatic approach. In Proc. of WWW '08, pages 199--208, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. P. Bedi, H. Kaur, and S. Marwaha. Trust based recommender system for semantic web. In Proc. of IJCAI '07, pages 2677--2682, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J.S. Breese, D. Heckerman, and C. Kadie. Empirical analysis of predictive algorithms for collaborative filtering. In Proc. of UAI '98, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. Canny. Collaborative filtering with privacy via factor analysis. In Proc. of SIGIR '02, pages 238--245, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. M. Deshpande and G. Karypis. Item-based top-n recommendation. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 22(1):143--177, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. J.L. Herlocker, J.A. Konstan, A. Borchers, and J. Riedl. An algorithmic framework for performing collaborative filtering. In Proc. of SIGIR '99, pages 230--237, New York, NY, USA, 1999. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. T. Hofmann. Collaborative filtering via gaussian probabilistic latent semantic analysis. In Proc. of SIGIR '03, pages 259--266, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. T. Hofmann. Latent semantic models for collaborative filtering. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 22(1):89--115, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. R. Jin, J.Y. Chai, and L. Si. An automatic weighting scheme for collaborative filtering. In Proc. of SIGIR '04, pages 337--344, New York, NY, USA, 2004. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. G. Linden, B. Smith, and J. York. Amazon.com recommendations: Item-to-item collaborative filtering. IEEE Internet Computing, pages 76--80, Jan/Feb 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. N.N. Liu and Q. Yang. Eigenrank: a ranking-oriented approach to collaborative filtering. In Proc. of SIGIR '08, pages 83--90, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. H. Ma, I. King, and M.R. Lyu. Effective missing data prediction for collaborative filtering. In Proc. of SIGIR '07, pages 39--46, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. H. Ma, H. Yang, M.R. Lyu, and I. King. SoRec: Social recommendation using probabilistic matrix factorization. In Proc. of CIKM '08, pages 931--940, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. P. Massa and P. Avesani. Trust-aware collaborative filtering for recommender systems. In Proc. of CoopIS/DOA/ODBASE, pages 492--508, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. P. Massa and P. Avesani. Trust-aware recommender systems. In Proc. of RecSys, pages 17--24, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. J.D.M. Rennie and N. Srebro. Fast maximum margin matrix factorization for collaborative prediction. In Proc. of ICML '05, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. P. Resnick, N. Iacovou, M. Suchak, P. Bergstrom, and J. Riedl. Grouplens: An open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews. In Proc. of CSCW '94, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. R. Salakhutdinov and A. Mnih. Bayesian probabilistic matrix factorization using markov chain monte carlo. In Proc. of ICML '08, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. R. Salakhutdinov and A. Mnih. Probabilistic matrix factorization. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. B. Sarwar, G. Karypis, J. Konstan, and J. Reidl. Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. In Proc. of WWW '01, pages 285--295, New York, NY, USA, 2001. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. L. Si and R. Jin. Flexible mixture model for collaborative filtering. In Proc. of ICML '03, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. N. Srebro and T. Jaakkola. Weighted low-rank approximations. In Proc. of ICML '03, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. J. Wang, A.P. de Vries, and M.J.T. Reinders. Unifying user-based and item-based collaborative filtering approaches by similarity fusion. In Proc. of SIGIR '06, pages 501--508, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Y. Zhang and J. Koren. Efficient bayesian hierarchical user modeling for recommendation system. In Proc. of SIGIR '07, pages 47--54, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Learning to recommend with social trust ensemble

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          SIGIR '09: Proceedings of the 32nd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval
          July 2009
          896 pages
          ISBN:9781605584836
          DOI:10.1145/1571941

          Copyright © 2009 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 July 2009

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate792of3,983submissions,20%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader