Exploiting user similarity based on rated-item pools for improved user-based collaborative filtering

ABSTRACT

An approach to user-based collaborative filtering is proposed that refines prediction of item ratings that is based on global user similarity by incorporating information derived from a more detailed user comparison made on the basis of Rated Item Pools (RIPs). The preference spectrum defined by items that a user has rated, and ranging from best-liked to most disliked items, is divided into item sets, or RIPs, which supply the basis for a fine-grained calculation of similarity between users. The RIP-based approach makes it possible for the model to take advantage of user tastes that are matched at one end of the spectrum, e.g., two users agree on favorites, without requiring complete correspondence of item ratings between user profiles. The approach improves rating prediction, as compared to a baseline that uses the global user similarity alone. It does not unduly inflate computational complexity or rely on external resources, common shortcomings of competing rating prediction methods. Cases in which the nearest neighbors are relatively dissimilar, known to be challenging for user-based collaborative filtering, demonstrate particularly substantial improvement. Performance is shown to be stable across the choice of neighborhood size, number of pools and relative pool size.

REFERENCES

• 1: Adomavicius G. and Tuzhilin A., "Toward the next generation of recommender systems: A survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions", IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol.17, no. 6, Jun. 2005, 734--749.
• 2: Adomavicius G. and Kwon Y., "New recommendation techniques for multicriteria rating systems", IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 22, no. 3, May-Jun. 2007, 48--55.
• 3: Breese J. S., Hackerman D., and Kardie C., "Empirical analysis of predictive algorithms for collaborative filtering", Technical Report, Microsoft Research, May. 1998.
• 4: Das A., Datar M., Garg A., and Rajaram S., "Google news personalization: scalable online collaborative filtering", in the proceedings of ACM WWW (Banff, Alberta, Canada, 2007), ACM, 271--280.
• 5: Ding S., Zhao S., Yuan Q., Zhang X., Fu R. and Bergman L., "Boosting collaborative filtering based on statistical prediction errors", in the Proceedings of ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (Lausanne, Switzerland, 2008), ACM, 3--10.
• 6: Hanjalic A., "Extracting moods from pictures and sounds: Towards truly personalized TV", IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, Special Issue on Semantic Retrieval of Multimedia, vol. 23, no. 2, Mar. 2006, 90--100.
• 7: Herlocker, J., Konstan, J., Borchers, A., and Riedl, J., "An algorithmic framework for performing collaborative filtering", in the Proceedings of ACM SIGIR (Berkeley, California, United States, 1999), ACM, 230 -- 237.
• 8: Hofmann T., "Latent semantic models for collaborative filtering", ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 22, no. 1, Jan. 2004, 89--115.
• 9: Huang Z., Zeng D. and Chen H., "A comparison of collaborative-filtering recommendation algorithms for E-commerce", IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 22, no. 5, Sept.--Oct. 2007, 68--78.
• 10: Karypis G., "Evaluation of item-based top-N recommendation algorithms", in the Proceedings of ACM 10th Conf. Information and Knowledge Management, (Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 2001), 247--254.
• 11: Linden G., Smith B., and York J., "Amazon.com recommendations: item-to-item collaborative filtering", IEEE Internet Computing, vol. 7, no. 1, Jan/Feb. 2003, 76--80.
• 12: Ma H., King I., and Lyu M. R., "Effective missing data prediction for collaborative filtering", in the Proceedings of ACM SIGIR (Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2007), ACM, 39--46.
• 13: Moshfeghi Y., Agarwal D., Piwowarski B., and Jose J., "Movie recommender: Semantically enriched unifed relevance model for rating prediction in collaborative filtering", in the Proceedings of 31th ECIR (Toulouse, France, 2009), 54--65.
• 14: Resnick P., Iacovou N., Suchak M., Bergstorm P., and Riedl J., "Grouplens: An open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews", in the Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, (Chapel Hill, North, Carolina, 1994), ACM, 175--186.
• 15: Sarwar B., Karypis G., Konstan J., and Riedl J., "Application of dimensionality reduction in recommender system: A case study", Proceedings of WebKDD Workshop, (Boston, MA, USA, 2000).
• 16: Shardanand U. and Maes P., "Social information filtering: Algorithms for automating 'word of mouth'", in the Proceedings of SIGCHI, (Denver, Colorado, United States, 1995), 210---217.
• 17: Wang J., Vries A. P., and Reinders M. J. T., "Unified relevance models for rating prediction in collaborative filtering", ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 26, no. 3, article. 16, 42 pages, Jun. 2008
• 18: Zanker M., Jannach D., Gordea S., and Jessenitschnig M., "Comparing recommendation strategies in a commercial context", IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 22, no. 3, May-Jun. 2007, 69--73.
• 19: Zhang J. and Pu P., "A recursive prediction algorithm for collaborative filtering recommender systems", In the Proceedings of ACM conference on Recommender Systems, (Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2007), ACM, 57--64.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.3 INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL
      H.3.3 Information Search and Retrieval
          Subjects: Information filtering

General Terms:
Algorithms, Experimentation, Performance

Keywords:
collaborative filtering, community-based multimedia content management, recommendation, recommender systems, user-item matrix