Are We Solving a Well-Defined Problem? A Task-Centric Perspective on Recommendation Tasks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.21188v2
• Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2025 05:19:42 GMT
• Title: Are We Solving a Well-Defined Problem? A Task-Centric Perspective on Recommendation Tasks
• Authors: Aixin Sun,
• Abstract summary: We analyze RecSys task formulations, emphasizing key components such as input-output structures, temporal dynamics, and candidate item selection.<n>We explore the balance between task specificity and model generalizability, highlighting how well-defined task formulations serve as the foundation for robust evaluation and effective solution development.
• Score: 46.705107776194616
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recommender systems (RecSys) leverage user interaction history to predict and suggest relevant items, shaping user experiences across various domains. While many studies adopt a general problem definition, i.e., to recommend preferred items to users based on past interactions, such abstraction often lacks the domain-specific nuances necessary for practical deployment. However, models are frequently evaluated using datasets from online recommender platforms, which inherently reflect these specificities. In this paper, we analyze RecSys task formulations, emphasizing key components such as input-output structures, temporal dynamics, and candidate item selection. All these factors directly impact offline evaluation. We further examine the complexities of user-item interactions, including decision-making costs, multi-step engagements, and unobservable interactions, which may influence model design and loss functions. Additionally, we explore the balance between task specificity and model generalizability, highlighting how well-defined task formulations serve as the foundation for robust evaluation and effective solution development. By clarifying task definitions and their implications, this work provides a structured perspective on RecSys research. The goal is to help researchers better navigate the field, particularly in understanding specificities of the RecSys tasks and ensuring fair and meaningful evaluations.

Related papers

• Interactive Agents to Overcome Ambiguity in Software Engineering [61.40183840499932]
  AI agents are increasingly being deployed to automate tasks, often based on ambiguous and underspecified user instructions.<n>Making unwarranted assumptions and failing to ask clarifying questions can lead to suboptimal outcomes.<n>We study the ability of LLM agents to handle ambiguous instructions in interactive code generation settings by evaluating proprietary and open-weight models on their performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T17:12:26Z)
• ACEBench: Who Wins the Match Point in Tool Usage? [68.54159348899891]
  ACEBench is a comprehensive benchmark for assessing tool usage in Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>It categorizes data into three primary types based on evaluation methodology: Normal, Special, and Agent.<n>It provides a more granular examination of error causes across different data types.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-22T12:59:08Z)
• Can foundation models actively gather information in interactive environments to test hypotheses? [56.651636971591536]
  We introduce a framework in which a model must determine the factors influencing a hidden reward function.<n>We investigate whether approaches such as self- throughput and increased inference time improve information gathering efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T12:27:21Z)
• Active Preference-based Learning for Multi-dimensional Personalization [7.349038301460469]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable versatility across tasks, but aligning them with individual human preferences remains challenging. We propose an active preference learning framework that uses binary feedback to estimate user preferences across multiple objectives. We validate our approach through theoretical analysis and experiments on language generation tasks, demonstrating its feedback efficiency and effectiveness in personalizing model responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-01T11:49:33Z)
• ProcBench: Benchmark for Multi-Step Reasoning and Following Procedure [0.0]
  We propose a benchmark that focuses on a specific aspect of reasoning ability: the direct evaluation of multi-step inference. Our dataset comprises pairs of explicit instructions and corresponding questions, where the procedures necessary for solving the questions are entirely detailed within the instructions. By constructing problems that require varying numbers of steps to solve and evaluating responses at each step, we enable a thorough assessment of state-of-the-art LLMs' ability to follow instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T03:21:24Z)
• Do LLMs suffer from Multi-Party Hangover? A Diagnostic Approach to Addressee Recognition and Response Selection in Conversations [11.566214724241798]
  We propose a methodological pipeline to investigate model performance across specific structural attributes of conversations. We focus on Response Selection and Addressee Recognition tasks, to diagnose model weaknesses. Results show that response selection relies more on the textual content of conversations, while addressee recognition requires capturing their structural dimension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-27T10:07:33Z)
• Deep Learning-Based Object Pose Estimation: A Comprehensive Survey [73.74933379151419]
  We discuss the recent advances in deep learning-based object pose estimation. Our survey also covers multiple input data modalities, degrees-of-freedom of output poses, object properties, and downstream tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-13T14:44:22Z)
• The Shifted and The Overlooked: A Task-oriented Investigation of User-GPT Interactions [114.67699010359637]
  We analyze a large-scale collection of real user queries to GPT. We find that tasks such as design'' and planning'' are prevalent in user interactions but are largely neglected or different from traditional NLP benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T02:12:17Z)
• Loss Functions and Metrics in Deep Learning [0.0]
  This paper presents a comprehensive review of loss functions and performance metrics in deep learning. We show how different loss functions and evaluation metrics can be paired to address task-specific challenges. We highlight best practices for selecting or combining losses and metrics based on empirical behaviors and domain constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-05T23:53:55Z)
• Assisting Human Decisions in Document Matching [52.79491990823573]
  We devise a proxy matching task that allows us to evaluate which kinds of assistive information improve decision makers' performance. We find that providing black-box model explanations reduces users' accuracy on the matching task. On the other hand, custom methods that are designed to closely attend to some task-specific desiderata are found to be effective in improving user performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-16T17:45:20Z)

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.