skip to main content
10.1145/2736277.2741126acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

User Latent Preference Model for Better Downside Management in Recommender Systems

Published:18 May 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Downside management is an important topic in the field of recommender systems. User satisfaction increases when good items are recommended, but satisfaction drops significantly when bad recommendations are pushed to them. For example, a parent would be disappointed if violent movies are recommended to their kids and may stop using the recommendation system entirely. A vegetarian would feel steak-house recommendations useless. A CEO in a mid-sized company would feel offended by receiving intern-level job recommendations. Under circumstances where there is penalty for a bad recommendation, a bad recommendation is worse than no recommendation at all. While most existing work focuses on upside management (recommending the best items to users), this paper emphasizes on achieving better downside management (reducing the recommendation of irrelevant or offensive items to users). The approach we propose is general and can be applied to any scenario or domain where downside management is key to the system.

To tackle the problem, we design a user latent preference model to predict the user preference in a specific dimension, say, the dietary restrictions of the user, the acceptable level of adult content in a movie, or the geographical preference of a job seeker. We propose to use multinomial regression as the core model and extend it with a hierarchical Bayesian framework to address the problem of data sparsity. After the user latent preference is predicted, we leverage it to filter out downside items. We validate the soundness of our approach by evaluating it with an anonymous job application dataset on LinkedIn. The effectiveness of the latent preference model was demonstrated in both offline experiments and online A/B testings. The user latent preference model helps to improve the VPI (views per impression) and API (applications per impression) significantly which in turn achieves a higher user satisfaction.

References

  1. G. Adomavicius and A. Tuzhilin. Context-aware recommender systems. In Recommender systems handbook, pages 217--253. Springer, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. L. Baltrunas and X. Amatriain. Towards time-dependant recommendation based on implicit feedback. In Context-aware Recommender Systems Workshop at RecSys09. ACM, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M. Beal. Variational algorithms for approximate Bayesian inference. PhD thesis, University of London, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. J. Bennett and S. Lanning. The netflix prize. 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. D. M. Blei and J. D. Lafferty. A correlated topic model of science. The Annals of Applied Statistics, pages 17--35, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. D. Cohn and R. Morin. Who Moves? Who Stays Put? Where's Home? Technical report, Dec 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. P. Cremonesi, Y. Koren, and R. Turrin. Performance of recommender algorithms on top-n recommendation tasks. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM RecSys 2010, pages 39--46. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. L. Do and H. W. Lauw. Modeling contextual agreement in preferences. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW '14, pages 315--326. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. C. Elkan. The foundations of cost-sensitive learning. In Proceedings of the 17th IJCAI'01, IJCAI'01, pages 973--978. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. N. Golbandi, Y. Koren, and R. Lempel. Adaptive bootstrapping of recommender systems using decision trees. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM WSDM, WSDM '11, pages 595--604. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. N. Hariri, B. Mobasher, and R. Burke. Query-driven context aware recommendation. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on RecSys, RecSys '13, pages 9--16, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J. L. Herlocker, J. A. Konstan, A. Borchers, and J. Riedl. An algorithmic framework for performing collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR, pages 230--237. ACM, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. Jin, L. Si, C. Zhai, and J. Callan. Collaborative filtering with decoupled models for preferences and ratings. In Proceedings of the twelfth CIKM, pages 309--316. ACM, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Y. Koren. Factorization meets the neighborhood: a multifaceted collaborative filtering model. In Proceeding of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, KDD '08, pages 426--434. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. X. Liu and K. Aberer. Soco: A social network aided context-aware recommender system. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW '13, pages 781--802. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. B. Marlin and R. S. Zemel. The multiple multiplicative factor model for collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 21st ICML '04, page 73. ACM, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. R. J. Mooney and L. Roy. Content-based book recommending using learning for text categorization. In DL '00, pages 195--204. ACM, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. T. V. Nguyen, A. Karatzoglou, and L. Baltrunas. Gaussian process factorization machines for context-aware recommendations. In Proceedings of the 37th International ACM SIGIR Conference, SIGIR '14, pages 63--72. ACM, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. U. Panniello, A. Tuzhilin, M. Gorgoglione, C. Palmisano, and A. Pedone. Experimental comparison of pre- vs. post-filtering approaches in context-aware recommender systems. In Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on RecSys, RecSys '09, pages 265--268. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. D. Parra, A. Karatzoglou, X. Amatriain, and I. Yavuz. Implicit feedback recommendation via implicit-to-explicit ordinal logistic regression mapping. In Proceedings of the CARS-2011, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. D. Parra-Santander and P. Brusilovsky. Improving collaborative filtering in social tagging systems for the recommendation of scientific articles. Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, 1:136--142, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. M. Pazzani, D. Billsus, S. Michalski, and J. Wnek. Learning and revising user profiles: The identification of interesting web sites. In Machine Learning, pages 313--331, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. E. Shmueli, A. Kagian, Y. Koren, and R. Lempel. Care to comment?: recommendations for commenting on news stories. In Proceedings of the 21st WWW, WWW '12, pages 429--438. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. L. Si and R. Jin. Flexible mixture model for collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of ICML, pages 704--711. AAAI Press, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. K. Verbert, N. Manouselis, X. Ochoa, M. Wolpers, H. Drachsler, I. Bosnic, and E. Duval. Context-aware recommender systems for learning: a survey and future challenges. Learning Technologies, IEEE Transactions on, 5(4):318--335, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. J. Wang, B. Sarwar, and N. Sundaresan. Utilizing related products for post-purchase recommendation in e-commerce. In Proceedings of the fifth ACM conference on Recommender systems, RecSys '11, pages 329--332. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. J. Wang and Y. Zhang. Utilizing marginal net utility for recommendation in e-commerce. In Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR'11, pages 1003--1012. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. J. Wang and Y. Zhang. Opportunity model for e-commerce recommendation: right product, right time. In Proceedings of the 36th international ACM SIGIR Conference, SIGIR '13. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. J. Wang, Y. Zhang, C. Posse, and A. Bhasin. Is it time for a career switch. In Proceeding of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW '13. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. J. Weston, R. J. Weiss, and H. Yee. Nonlinear latent factorization by embedding multiple user interests. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on RecSys, RecSys '13, pages 65--68. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Y. Zhang, G. Lai, M. Zhang, Y. Zhang, Y. Liu, and S. Ma. Explicit factor models for explainable recommendation based on phrase-level sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the 37th International ACM SIGIR Conference, SIGIR '14, pages 83--92. ACM, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. User Latent Preference Model for Better Downside Management in Recommender Systems

    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 Other conferences
      WWW '15: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web
      May 2015
      1460 pages
      ISBN:9781450334693

      Copyright © 2015 Copyright is held by the International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2)

      Publisher

      International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee

      Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland

      Publication History

      • Published: 18 May 2015

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      WWW '15 Paper Acceptance Rate131of929submissions,14%Overall Acceptance Rate1,899of8,196submissions,23%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader