Triplet Losses-based Matrix Factorization for Robust Recommendations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2210.12098v1
• Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 16:44:59 GMT
• Title: Triplet Losses-based Matrix Factorization for Robust Recommendations
• Authors: Flavio Giobergia
• Abstract summary: We propose using multiple triplet losses terms to extract meaningful representations of users and items. We empirically evaluate the soundness of such representations through several "bias-aware" evaluation metrics.
• Score: 0.76146285961466
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Much like other learning-based models, recommender systems can be affected by biases in the training data. While typical evaluation metrics (e.g. hit rate) are not concerned with them, some categories of final users are heavily affected by these biases. In this work, we propose using multiple triplet losses terms to extract meaningful and robust representations of users and items. We empirically evaluate the soundness of such representations through several "bias-aware" evaluation metrics, as well as in terms of stability to changes in the training set and agreement of the predictions variance w.r.t. that of each user.

Related papers

• Debiased Recommendation with Noisy Feedback [41.38490962524047]
  We study intersectional threats to the unbiased learning of the prediction model from data MNAR and OME in the collected data. First, we design OME-EIB, OME-IPS, and OME-DR estimators, which largely extend the existing estimators to combat OME in real-world recommendation scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T23:42:18Z)
• $F_β$-plot -- a visual tool for evaluating imbalanced data classifiers [0.0]
  The paper proposes a simple approach to analyzing the popular parametric metric $F_beta$. It is possible to indicate for a given pool of analyzed classifiers when a given model should be preferred depending on user requirements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-11T18:07:57Z)
• Conformal Prediction in Multi-User Settings: An Evaluation [0.10231119246773925]
  Machine learning models are trained and evaluated without making any distinction between users. This produces inaccurate performance metrics estimates in multi-user settings. In this work we evaluated the conformal prediction framework in several multi-user settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T17:33:23Z)
• Debiasing Learning for Membership Inference Attacks Against Recommender Systems [79.48353547307887]
  Learned recommender systems may inadvertently leak information about their training data, leading to privacy violations. We investigate privacy threats faced by recommender systems through the lens of membership inference. We propose a Debiasing Learning for Membership Inference Attacks against recommender systems (DL-MIA) framework that has four main components.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-24T17:57:34Z)
• Understanding Programmatic Weak Supervision via Source-aware Influence Function [76.74549130841383]
  Programmatic Weak Supervision (PWS) aggregates the source votes of multiple weak supervision sources into probabilistic training labels. We build on Influence Function (IF) to decompose the end model's training objective and then calculate the influence associated with each (data, source, class) These primitive influence score can then be used to estimate the influence of individual component PWS, such as source vote, supervision source, and training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T15:57:24Z)
• Cross Pairwise Ranking for Unbiased Item Recommendation [57.71258289870123]
  We develop a new learning paradigm named Cross Pairwise Ranking (CPR) CPR achieves unbiased recommendation without knowing the exposure mechanism. We prove in theory that this way offsets the influence of user/item propensity on the learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-26T09:20:27Z)
• Correcting the User Feedback-Loop Bias for Recommendation Systems [34.44834423714441]
  We propose a systematic and dynamic way to correct user feedback-loop bias in recommendation systems. Our method includes a deep-learning component to learn each user's dynamic rating history embedding. We empirically validated the existence of such user feedback-loop bias in real world recommendation systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-13T15:02:55Z)
• Probabilistic and Variational Recommendation Denoising [56.879165033014026]
  Learning from implicit feedback is one of the most common cases in the application of recommender systems. We propose probabilistic and variational recommendation denoising for implicit feedback. We employ the proposed DPI and DVAE on four state-of-the-art recommendation models and conduct experiments on three datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-20T08:59:44Z)
• A Statistical Analysis of Summarization Evaluation Metrics using Resampling Methods [60.04142561088524]
  We find that the confidence intervals are rather wide, demonstrating high uncertainty in how reliable automatic metrics truly are. Although many metrics fail to show statistical improvements over ROUGE, two recent works, QAEval and BERTScore, do in some evaluation settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-31T18:28:14Z)
• A Skew-Sensitive Evaluation Framework for Imbalanced Data Classification [11.125446871030734]
  Class distribution skews in imbalanced datasets may lead to models with prediction bias towards majority classes. We propose a simple and general-purpose evaluation framework for imbalanced data classification that is sensitive to arbitrary skews in class cardinalities and importances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-12T19:47:09Z)
• Performance metrics for intervention-triggering prediction models do not reflect an expected reduction in outcomes from using the model [71.9860741092209]
  Clinical researchers often select among and evaluate risk prediction models. Standard metrics calculated from retrospective data are only related to model utility under certain assumptions. When predictions are delivered repeatedly throughout time, the relationship between standard metrics and utility is further complicated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-02T16:26:49Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.