Advertisement

International Journal of Fuzzy Systems

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 2368–2382 | Cite as

A Fuzzy Linguistic Approach-Based Non-malicious Noise Detection Algorithm for Recommendation System

  • J. Sharon Moses
  • L. D. Dhinesh Babu
Article
  • 36 Downloads

Abstract

In the world of web, recommendation system plays a vital role in predicting the user desirable item from a plethora of items. Since the recommendation system generates recommendations by processing the user ratings, the presence of irrelevant or noisy ratings will affect the accuracy of the recommendation system. Malicious users induce noise into the system in order to popularize or to de-promote a particular item which might result in reduced accuracy of recommendations. In addition to malicious users, genuine users offer noisy ratings to the items unknowingly. Despite several of the existing methods to detect and resolve the malicious noise, only few address the existence of natural or non-malicious noise in the recommendation system. Detecting natural noise is not as precise as dealing with the malicious noise. Since natural noise is caused by genuine user, the system needs to classify each rating from the perspective of user rating. In this paper, a fuzzy linguistic approach-based natural noise detection algorithm is proposed to address the uncertainty in detecting the non-malicious noise. The proposed detection algorithm is highly efficient as indicated by our experiments that evaluate noise-induced real-world data sets.

Keywords

Natural noise Non-malicious noise Recommender system Fuzzy linguistic term set Fuzzy detection algorithm 

References

  1. 1.
    Pazzani, M.J., Billsus, D.: Content-based recommendation systems. In: Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A., Nejdl, W. (eds.) The Adaptive Web, pp. 325–341. Springer, Berlin (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lam, S.K., Riedl, J.: Shilling recommender systems for fun and profit. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sarwar, B., Karypis, G., Konstan, J., Riedl, J.: Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on World Wide Web (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Su, X., Khoshgoftaar, T.M.: A survey of collaborative filtering techniques. Adv. Artif. Intell. 2009(1), 4 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Herlocker, J.L., Konstan, J.A., Terveen, L.G., Riedl, J.T.: Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst.(TOIS) 22(1), 5–53 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chirita, P.-A., Nejdl, W., Zamfir, C.: Preventing shilling attacks in online recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th Annual ACM International Workshop on Web Information and Data Management (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gunes, I., Kaleli, C., Bilge, A., Polat, H.: Shilling attacks against recommender systems: a comprehensive survey. Artif. Intell. Rev. 42(4), 767–799 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lam, S.K., Riedl, J.: Shilling recommender systems for fun and profit. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang, F.: A survey of shilling attacks in collaborative filtering recommender systems. In International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Software Engineering, CiSE 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dellarocas, C.: Immunizing online reputation reporting systems against unfair ratings and discriminatory behavior. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mobasher, B., Burke, R., Bhaumik, R., Williams, C.: Toward trustworthy recommender systems: an analysis of attack models and algorithm robustness. ACM Tran. Internet Technol. (TOIT) 7(4), 23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang, S., Ouyang, Y., Ford, J., Makedon, F.: Analysis of a low-dimensional linear model under recommendation attacks. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li, C., Luo, Z.: Detection of shilling attacks in collaborative filtering recommender systems. In: 2011 International Conference of Soft Computing and Pattern Recognition (SoCPaR) (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bhaumik, R., Williams, C., Mobasher, B. Burke, R.: Securing collaborative filtering against malicious attacks through anomaly detection. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Intelligent Techniques for Web Personalization (ITWP’06), Boston (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hurley, N., Cheng, Z., Zhang, M.: Statistical attack detection. In: Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Burke, R., Mobasher, B., Williams, C., Bhaumik, R.: Classification features for attack detection in collaborative recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burke, R., Mobasher, B., Williams, C., Bhaumik, R.: Detecting profile injection attacks in collaborative recommender systems. In: The 8th IEEE International Conference on and Enterprise Computing, E-Commerce, and E-Services (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bhaumik, R., Mobasher, B., Burke, R.: A clustering approach to unsupervised attack detection in collaborative recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Las Vegas, NV, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mehta, B., Nejdl, W.: Unsupervised strategies for shilling detection and robust collaborative filtering. User Model. User Adap. Inter. 19(1), 65–97 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tang, T., Tang, Y.: An effective recommender attack detection method based on time SFM factors. In: 2011 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Communication Software and Networks (ICCSN) (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bryan, K., O’Mahony, M., Cunningham, P.: Unsupervised retrieval of attack profiles in collaborative recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhou, Q.: Supervised approach for detecting average over popular items attack in collaborative recommender systems. IET Inf. Secur. 10(3), 134–141 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bilge, A., Ozdemir, Z., Polat, H.: A novel shilling attack detection method. In: Procedia Computer Science (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Garcia, L.P., Ana, L., Stan, C.M., de André CPLF, C.: Ensembles of label noise filters: a ranking approach. Data Min. Knowl. Discov. 30(5), 1192–1216 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bilge, A., Gunes, I., Polat, H.: Robustness analysis of privacy-preserving model-based recommendation schemes. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(8), 3671–3681 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chung, C.-Y., Hsu, P.-Y., Huang, S.-H.: βP: a novel approach to filter out malicious rating profiles from recommender systems. Decis. Support Syst. 55(1), 314–325 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yilmazel, B.Y., Kaleli, C.: Robustness analysis of arbitrarily distributed data-based recommendation methods. Expert Syst. Appl. 44, 217–229 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Amatriain, X., Lathia, N., Pujol, J.M., Kwak, H., Oliver, N.: The wisdom of the few: a collaborative filtering approach based on expert opinions from the web. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (2009)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    O’Mahony, M.P., Hurley, N.J., Guénolé, S.: Detecting noise in recommender system databases. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Amatriain, X., Pujol, J.M., Oliver, N.: I like it… i like it not: evaluating user ratings noise in recommender systems. In: International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization (2009)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pham, X.H., Jung, J.J., Nguyen, N.-T.: Integrating multiple experts for correction process in interactive recommendation systems. In: International Conference on Computational Collective Intelligence (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pham, H.X., Jung, J.J.: Preference-based user rating correction process for interactive recommendation systems. Multimed. Tools Appl. 65(1), 119–132 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Li, B., Chen, L., Zhu, X., Zhang, C.: Noisy but non-malicious user detection in social recommender systems. World Wide Web 16(5–6), 677–699 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Toledo, R.Y., Yailé, C.M., Martínez, L.: Correcting noisy ratings in collaborative recommender systems. Knowl. Based Syst. 76, 96–108 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Amatriain, X., Pujol, J.M., Tintarev, N., Oliver, N.: Rate it again: increasing recommendation accuracy by user re-rating. In: Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (2009)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Said, A., Jain, B.J., Narr, S., Plumbaum, T.: Users and noise: the magic barrier of recommender systems. In: International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization (2012)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kluver, D., Nguyen, T.T., Ekstrand, M., Sen, S., Riedl, J.: How many bits per rating? In: Proceedings of the Sixth ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (2012)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cosley, D., Lam, S.K., Albert, I., Konstan, J.A., Riedl, J.: Is seeing believing?: How recommender system interfaces affect users’ opinions. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Fort lauderdale, Florida (2003)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yera, R., Castro, J., Martínez, L.: A fuzzy model for managing natural noise in recommender systems. Appl. Soft Comput. 40, 187–198 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Martínez, L., Jorge, C., Raciel, Y.: Managing natural noise in recommender systems. In: 5th International Conference In Theory and Practice of Natural Computing, Sendai, Japan (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    López, V., Alberto, F., Salvador, G., Vasile, P.: An insight into classification with imbalanced data: empirical results and current trends on using data intrinsic characteristics. Inf. Sci. 250, 113–141 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Vaishali, S., Rao, K.K., Rao, G.S.: A review on noise reduction methods for brain MRI images. In: 2015 International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication Engineering Systems (SPACES) (2015)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. In: Kaoru, H., George, J.K., Elie, S., Pei-Zhuang, W., Ronald, R.Y. (eds.) Advances in Fuzzy Systems—Applications and Theory, vol. 8, no. 3. World Scientific (1965)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Yager, R.R., Zadeh, L.A.: An Introduction to Fuzzy Logic Applications in Intelligent Systems. Springer, Berlin (2012)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Rodríguez, R.M., Luis, M.: An analysis of symbolic linguistic computing models in decision making. Int. J. Gen. Syst. 42(1), 121–136 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Computing with Words: Principal Concepts and Ideas. Springer, Berlin (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Castro, J., Raciel, Y., Luis, M.: An empirical study of natural noise management in group recommendation systems. Decis. Support Syst. 94(1), 1–11 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Beel, J., Langer, S., Nürnberger, A., Genzmehr, M.: The impact of demographics (age and gender) and other user-characteristics on evaluating recommender systems. In: Aalberg, T., Papatheodorou, C., Dobreva, M., Tsakonas, G., Farrugia, C.J. (eds.) Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries, pp. 396–400. Springer, Berlin (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bai, Y., Wang, D.: Fundamentals of fuzzy logic control—fuzzy sets, fuzzy rules and defuzzifications. In: Bai, Y., Zhuang, H., Wang, D. Advanced Fuzzy Logic Technologies in Industrial Applications, pp. 17–36. Springer, Berlin (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Klir, G., Yuan, B.: Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Harper, F.M., Konstan, J.A.: The movielens datasets: history and context. ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst. (TiiS) 5(4), 19 (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Taiwan Fuzzy Systems Association and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information Technology and EngineeringVIT UniversityVelloreIndia

Personalised recommendations