| Experimental comparison of pre- vs. post-filtering approaches in context-aware recommender systems |
| Full text |
Pdf
(468 KB)
|
Source
|
ACM Conference On Recommender Systems
archive
Proceedings of the third ACM conference on Recommender systems
table of contents
New York, New York, USA
SESSION: Short papers
table of contents
Pages 265-268
Year of Publication: 2009
ISBN:978-1-60558-435-5
|
|
Authors
|
|
Umberto Panniello
|
Polytechnic of Bari, Bari, Italy
|
|
Alexander Tuzhilin
|
New York University, New York, USA
|
|
Michele Gorgoglione
|
Polytechnic of Bari, Bari, Italy
|
|
Cosimo Palmisano
|
Aizoon Consulting, Turin, Italy
|
|
Anto Pedone
|
Polytechnic of Bari, Bari, Italy
|
|
| Sponsor |
|
| Publisher |
|
| Bibliometrics |
Downloads (6 Weeks): 18, Downloads (12 Months): 18, Citation Count: 0
|
|
|
ABSTRACT
Recently, methods for generating context-aware recommendations were classified into the pre-filtering, post-filtering and contextual modeling approaches. Although some of these methods have been studied independently, no prior research compared the performance of these methods to determine which of them is better than the others. This paper focuses on comparing the pre-filtering and the post-filtering approaches and identifying which method dominates the other and under which circumstances. Since there are no clear winners in this comparison, we propose an alternative more effective method of selecting the winners in the pre- vs. the post-filtering comparison. This strategy provides analysts and companies with a practical suggestion on how to pick a good pre- or post-filtering approach in an effective manner to improve performance of a context-aware recommender system.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
| |
1
|
Adomavicius, G., Sankaranarayanan, R.,Sen, S., and Tuzhilin, A. 2005. Incorporating contextual information in recommender systems using a multidimensional approach. ACM T. Inform. Syst. 23, 1 (2005), 103--145.
|
| |
2
|
Adomavicius, G., and Tuzhilin, A. 2001. Multidimensional recommender systems: a data warehousing approach. In Proc. of WECOM Conference, LNCS, 2232 Springer.
|
| |
3
|
Adomavicius, G., and Tuzhilin, A. 2008. Context-Aware Recommender Systems. ACM RecSys Tutorial, 2008.
|
| |
4
|
Anand, A., and Mobasher, B. 2007. Contextual Recommendation. In From Web to Social Web: Discovering and Deploying User and Content Profiles (September 2006), Springer, Berlin, 142--160.
|
| |
5
|
Bettman, J.R., Luce, M.F, and Payne, J.W. 1998. Constructive consumer choice processes. JCR, 25(3).
|
| |
6
|
Kachigan, S.C. 1986 Statistical Analysis. Radius Press.
|
| |
7
|
Nichols, D.M. 1998. Implicit rating and filtering. In Proceedings of the 5th DELOS Workshop.
|
| |
8
|
Oku, K., Nakajima, S., Miyazaki, J. and Uemura, S., 2006. Context-aware SVM for context-dependent information recommendation.7th Intl. Conf. on Mobile Data Managmnt
|
| |
9
|
Palmisano, C., Tuzhilin, A., and Gorgoglione, M. 2008. Using Context to Improve Predictive Models of Customers in Personalization Applications. IEEE TKDE, 20(11).
|
|