skip to main content
10.1145/3427423.3427425acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessietConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Hybrid popularity model for solving cold-start problem in recommendation system

Authors Info & Claims
Published:28 December 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

This research proposes a new hybrid popularity model for solving the cold-start problem in the recommendation system. A cold-start problem arises when the target user has no rating history in the system. A hybrid popularity model combines the benefit of both the user and item popularities. The item popularity model assumes that a target user is most expected to like the top-rated items. Whereas the user popularity model presumes that a target user is likely to be influenced by the top users who have given a large number of ratings. Naturally, our proposed HPop model is built in three phases: item popularity, user popularity, and hybrid popularity. The ratio of the item and user popularities are controlled by the use of α. We use the Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain (NDCG), as well as Precision and Recall metrics to evaluate the performance of our model and its counterparts, i.e., IPop and UPop. Using a real-world MovieLens dataset, our experiments show that the employment of the user popularity model is always more beneficial than the item popularity model. HPop performs best when α = 0.9 and worst when α = 1. The NDCG average of increases from HPop to IPop and UPop are respectively 12.22% and 8.02%. The results in terms of Precision-Recall also show a similar trend to those of NDCG. Hence, we conjecture that the performances of HPop, IPop, and UPop are stable in any evaluation metrics.

References

  1. Guo, G., Zhang, J., and Thalmann, D., "Merging trust in collaborative filtering to alleviate data sparsity and cold start," Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 57, pp. 57--68, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Loh, S., Lorenzi, F., Granada, R., Lichtnow, D., Wives, L. K., and de Oliveira, J. P., "Identifying Similar Users by their Scientific Publications to Reduce Cold Start in Recommender Systems," in Proceeding of 5th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies (WEBIST 2009), 2009, pp. 593--600.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Aggarwal, C. C., Recommender Systems: The Textbook. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Ifada, N. and Nayak, R., "An Efficient Tagging Data Interpretation and Representation Scheme for Item Recommendation," in Proceeding of The 12th Australasian Data Mining Conference, Brisbane, Australia, 2014, pp. 205--215.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Jadhav, S. L. and Mali, M. P., "Pre-Recommendation Clustering and Review Based Approach for Collaborative Filtering Based Movie Recommendation," International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science, vol. 8, pp. 72--80, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Sarwar, B., Karypis, G., Konstan, J., and Riedl, J., "Item-based Collaborative Filtering Recommendation Algorithms," in Proceeding of The 10th International Conference on World Wide Web, Hong Kong, 2001, pp. 285--295. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Wang, J. and Luo, N., "A New Hybrid Popular Model for Personalized Tag Recommendation," Journal of Computers, vol. 11, pp. 116--123, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Sarwar, B. M., Karypis, G., Konstan, J., and Riedl, J., "Recommender Systems for Large-scale E-Commerce: Scalable Neighborhood Formation Using Clustering," in Proceeding of The 5th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2002, pp. 23--28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Koohi, H. and Kiani, K., "User based Collaborative Filtering using fuzzy C-means," Measurement, vol. 91, pp. 134--139, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Kumar, N. P. and Fan, Z., "Hybrid User-Item Based Collaborative Filtering," Procedia Computer Science, vol. 60, pp. 1453--1461, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Wei, S., Ye, N., Zhang, S., Huang, X., and Zhu, J., "Collaborative filtering recommendation algorithm based on item clustering and global similarity," in Proceeding of The 5th International Conference on Business Intelligence and Financial Engineering (BIFE), Lanzhou, China, 2012, pp. 69--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Nagatani, K. and Sato, M., "Accurate and Diverse Recommendation based on Users' Tendencies toward Temporal Item Popularity," in Proceeding of RecTemp@RecSys, Como, Italy, 2017, pp. 35--39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Steck, H., "Item popularity and recommendation accuracy," in Proceeding of The fifth ACM conference on Recommender systems, 2011, pp. 125--132. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Wang, X., Zhang, Y., and Yamasaki, T., "Earn More Social Attention: User Popularity Based Tag Recommendation System," in Proceeding of Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020, Taipei, Taiwan, 2020, pp. 212--216. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Gueye, M., Abdessalem, T., and Nacke, H., "A Social and Popularity-Based Tag Recommender," in Proceeding of The 2014 IEEE Fourth International Conference on Big Data and Cloud Computing 2014, December., pp. 318--325. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Barman, K. and Dabeer, O., "Local popularity based collaborative filters," in Proceeding of The 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, 2010, pp. 1668--1672.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kapoor, A. and Singhal, A., "A comparative study of K-Means, K-Means++ and Fuzzy C-Means clustering algorithms," in Proceeding of The 2017 3rd international conference on computational intelligence & communication technology (CICT), Ghaziabad, India, 2017, pp. 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Cao, F., Liang, J., Li, D., Bai, L., and Dang, C., "A dissimilarity measure for the k-Modes clustering algorithm," Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 26, pp. 120--127, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Khan, S. S. and Ahmad, A., "Cluster center initialization algorithm for K-modes clustering," Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 40, pp. 7444--7456, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Harper, F. and Konstan, J., "The movielens datasets: History and context," ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, vol. 5, pp. 1--19, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Hybrid popularity model for solving cold-start problem in recommendation system

    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
      SIET '20: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Sustainable Information Engineering and Technology
      November 2020
      277 pages
      ISBN:9781450376051
      DOI:10.1145/3427423

      Copyright © 2020 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: 28 December 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      SIET '20 Paper Acceptance Rate45of57submissions,79%Overall Acceptance Rate45of57submissions,79%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader