Skip to main content

Using Mutual Influence to Improve Recommendations

  • Conference paper
String Processing and Information Retrieval (SPIRE 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 8214))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this work we show how items in recommender systems mutually influence each other’s utility and how it can be explored to improve recommendations. The way we model mutual influence is cheap and can be computed without requiring any source of content information about either items or users. We propose an algorithm that considers mutual influence to generate recommendations and analyse it over different recommendation datasets. We compare our algorithm with the Top − N selection algorithm and obtain gains up to 17% in the utility of recommendations without affecting their diversity. We also analyse the scalability of our algorithm and show that it is as applicable for real-world recommender systems as Top − N.

The original version of this chapter was revised: The copyright line was incorrect. This has been corrected. The Erratum to this chapter is available at DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-02432-5_33

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Toffler, A.: Future Shock. Random House (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Adomavicius, G., Tuzhilin, A.: Towards the next generation of recommender systems: A survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 17(6), 734–749 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tversky, A.: Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. Psychological Review 79(4), 281–299 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Passos, A., Gael, J.V., Herbrich, R., Paquet, U.: A penny for your thoughts? the value of information in recommendation systems. In: NIPS Workshop on Bayesian Optimization, Experimental Design, and Bandits, pp. 9–14 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Vargas, S., Castells, P.: Rank and relevance in novelty and diversity metrics for recommender systems. In: RecSys., pp. 109–116 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cremonesi, P., Koren, Y., Turrin, R.: Performance of recommender algorithms on top-n recommendation tasks. In: RecSys., pp. 39–46 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wang, J.: Mean-variance analysis: A new document ranking theory in information retrieval. In: Boughanem, M., Berrut, C., Mothe, J., Soule-Dupuy, C. (eds.) ECIR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5478, pp. 4–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B., Kantor, P.B. (eds.): Recommender Systems Handbook. Springer (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Xiong, C., Wang, T., Ding, W., Shen, Y., Liu, T.Y.: Relational click prediction for sponsored search. In: WSDM, pp. 493–502 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Weston, J., Blitzer, J.: Latent structured ranking. In: UAI, pp. 903–913 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Papagelis, M., Plexousakis, D.: Qualitative analysis of user-based and item-based prediction algorithms for recommendation agents. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 18(7), 781–789 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Koren, Y.: Factorization meets the neighborhood: a multifaceted collaborative filtering model. In: SIGKDD, pp. 426–434 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nemhauser, G., Wolsey, L.: Integer and combinatorial optimization. Wiley (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Breese, J., Heckerman, D., Kadie, C.: Empirical analysis of predictive algorithms for collaborative filtering. In: UAI, pp. 43–52 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  15. McNee, S.M., Riedl, J., Konstan, J.A.: Being accurate is not enough: how accuracy metrics have hurt recommender systems. In: SIGCHI, pp. 1097–1101 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zhang, M., Hurley, N.: Avoiding monotony: improving the diversity of recommendation lists. In: RecSys., pp. 123–130 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bell, R., Koren, Y.: Lessons from the netflix prize challenge. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter 9(2) (2007)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bessa, A., Veloso, A., Ziviani, N. (2013). Using Mutual Influence to Improve Recommendations. In: Kurland, O., Lewenstein, M., Porat, E. (eds) String Processing and Information Retrieval. SPIRE 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8214. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02432-5_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02432-5_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-02431-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-02432-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics