Bringing Diversity to Recommendation Lists – An Analysis of the Placement of Diverse Items

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 141)

Abstract

The core task of a recommender system is to provide users with a ranked list of recommended items. In many cases, the ranking is based one a recommendation score representing the estimated degree to which the users will like them. Up to now research specifically focused on the accuracy of recommender algorithms in predicting the relevance of items for a given user. However, researchers agree that there are other factors than prediction accuracy which can have a significant effect on the overall quality of a recommender system. Therefore, additional and complementary metrics, including diversity, novelty, transparency and serendipity should be used to evaluate the quality of recommender systems.

In this paper we will focus on diversity which has been more widely discussed in recent research and is often considered to be a factor which is equally important as accuracy. In particular we address the question of how to place diverse items in a recommendation list and measure the user-perceived level of diversity. Differently placing the diverse items can affect perceived diversity and the level of serendipity. Furthermore, the results of our analysis show that including diverse items in a recommendation list can both increase and sometimes even decrease the perceived diversity and that the effect depends on how the diverse items are arranged.

Keywords

Recommender system Evaluation Diversity Serendipity Item ranking User satisfaction 

References

  1. 1.
    Adomavicius, G., Kwon, Y.: Improving aggregate recommendation diversity using ranking-based techniques. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 99, 1–15 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adomavicius, G., Kwon, Y.: Maximizing aggregate recommendation diversity: a graph-theoretic approach. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Novelty and Diversity in Recommender Systems, Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp. 3–10 (2011b)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adamopoulos, P., Tuzhilin, A.: On unexpectedness in recommender systems: or how to expect the unexpected. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Novelty and Diversity in Recommender Systems, Chicago, Illinois, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castells, P., Vargas, S., Wang, J.: Novelty and diversity metrics for recommender systems: choice, discovery and relevance. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Diversity in Document Retrieval, Dublin, Ireland, pp. 29–37 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clarke, C. L. A., Craswell, N., Soboroff, I., Ashkan, A.: A comparative analysis of cascade measures for novelty and diversity. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, Hong Kong, China, pp. 75–84 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dias, M. B., Locher, D., Li, M., El-Deredy, W., Lisboa, P. J.: The value of personalised recommender systems to e-business: a case study. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp. 291–294 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fleder, D., Hosanagar, K.: Recommender systems and their impact on sales diversity. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 192–199 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ge, M., Delgado-Battenfeld, C., Jannach, D.: Beyond accuracy: evaluating recommender systems by coverage and serendipity. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, New York, pp. 257–260 (2010) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gedikli, F., Ge, M., Jannach, D.: Understanding recommendations by reading the clouds. In: Huemer, C., Setzer, T. (eds.) EC-Web 2011. LNBIP, vol. 85, pp. 196–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herlocker, L., Konstan, J., Terveen, L., Riedl, J.: Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems. ACM Trans. Info. Syst. 22(1), 5–53 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jannach, D., Hegelich, K.: A case study on the effectiveness of recommendations in the mobile Internet, pp. 205–208. ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jannach, D., Zanker, M., Felfernig, A., Friedrich G.: Recommender Systems: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jannach, D., Zanker, M., Ge, M., Gröning, M.: Recommender Systems in Computer Science and Information Systems – A Landscape of Research. In: Huemer, C., Lops, P. (eds.) EC-Web 2012. LNBIP, vol. 123, pp. 76–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lathia, N., Hailes, S., Capra, L., Amatriain, X.: Temporal diversity in recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 210–217 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McNee, S., Riedl, J., Konstan, J.: Being accurate is not enough: how accuracy metrics have hurt recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Montréal, Canada, pp. 1097–1101 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smyth, B., McClave, P.: Similarity vs. Diversity. In: Aha, D.W., Watson, I. (eds.) ICCBR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2080, pp. 347–361. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sakai, T.: Challenges in diversity evaluation. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Diversity in Document Retrieval. Dublin, Ireland, pp. 1–7 (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhou, T., Kuscsika, Z., Liua, J., Medoa, M., Wakelinga, J., Zhang, Y.: Solving the apparent diversity-accuracy dilemma of recommender systems. In: Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of the USA, vol. 107 (10), pp. 4511–4515 (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang, M., Hurley, N.: Avoiding monotony: improving the diversity of recommendation lists. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp. 123–130 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ziegler, C., McNee, S., Konstan, J., Lausen, G.: Improving recommendation lists through topic diversification. In: Proceedings of the 14th World Wide Web Conference. Chiba, Japan, pp. 22–32 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zanker, M., Bricman, M., Gordea, S., Jannach, D., Jessenitschnig, M.: Persuasive online-selling in quality and taste domains. In: Bauknecht, K., Pröll, B., Werthner, H. (eds.) EC-Web 2006. LNCS, vol. 4082, pp. 51–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bundeswehr University MunichNeubibergGermany
  2. 2.TU DortmundDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations