2013
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-39068-5_47
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Robust Multi-criteria Recommendation Approach with Preference-Based Similarity and Support Vector Machine

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, in terms of improvements with regard to prediction accuracy, the MGA in Table 3 column one has MAE = 0.961 and RMSE = 1.396, and the corresponding single rating SVD in Table 1 × 100 52.68% and similarly, the percent decrease in RMSE = 51.14%. This is far better than the 16% decrease in MAE of support vector machine approach that was investigated by Fan and Xu 14 , not to talk of a linear regression method, which only reduces the error by 15% 35 . The same comparison can be made with other approaches such as the fuzzy-based approach 38 , the hybrid approach 37 which combined selforganizing map (SOM) with fuzzy techniques to improve the prediction accuracy, Jannach et al 27 who proposed a support vector regression method for improving the accuracy of multi-criteria, and so on.…”
Section: Comparative Analysismentioning
confidence: 79%
“…For instance, in terms of improvements with regard to prediction accuracy, the MGA in Table 3 column one has MAE = 0.961 and RMSE = 1.396, and the corresponding single rating SVD in Table 1 × 100 52.68% and similarly, the percent decrease in RMSE = 51.14%. This is far better than the 16% decrease in MAE of support vector machine approach that was investigated by Fan and Xu 14 , not to talk of a linear regression method, which only reduces the error by 15% 35 . The same comparison can be made with other approaches such as the fuzzy-based approach 38 , the hybrid approach 37 which combined selforganizing map (SOM) with fuzzy techniques to improve the prediction accuracy, Jannach et al 27 who proposed a support vector regression method for improving the accuracy of multi-criteria, and so on.…”
Section: Comparative Analysismentioning
confidence: 79%
“…As an example of such cases, the AsymSVD predicted 5.7 instead of 13, and 10.3 instead of 2. However, while the result is [12] 44.44% 32.60% Lakiotaki et al [28] 50.79% 48.13% Jannach et al [32] − 29.62% Fan et al [33] 16.00% − Sahoo et al [34] 49.64% − not generally bad, these discrepancies are also attributed to the problems of prediction accuracy of the AsymSVD. On the other hand, the correlation between the predictions of the proposed ANN-based model and the actual ratings presented in Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Even though the work presented in [36] utilizes denoising autoencoders to extract features from content information, the work is still based on linear assumption during prediction process. [37] propose to use preference-based similarity instead of computing correlations over sparse rating profiles to handle with sparsity issue. Additionally, reducing dimensions of users'/items' sparse preferences into low-dimensional dense space helps to deal with both sparsity and scalability issues.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%