2004
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-30104-2_12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Qualitative Analysis of User-Based and Item-Based Prediction Algorithms for Recommendation Agents

Abstract: Recommendation agents employ prediction algorithms to provide users with items that match their interests. In this paper, several prediction algorithms are described and evaluated, some of which are novel in that they combine user-based and item-based similarity measures derived from either explicit or implicit ratings. Both statistical and decision-support accuracy metrics of the algorithms are compared against different levels of data sparsity and different operational thresholds. The first metric evaluates … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
34
0
2

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
34
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…As stated before, there are not works appliying this metric in the field of application of SINVLIO. However we can see that SINVLIO results is in the line of [67], where results peek 0.65, provides better results than [27], [37], where coverage are around 0.38 and are less than [59]. In this latter case, where coverage slightly less than perfect for typical level of sparsity (Coverage: 99%), the dataset is more convenient to produce good results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%
“…As stated before, there are not works appliying this metric in the field of application of SINVLIO. However we can see that SINVLIO results is in the line of [67], where results peek 0.65, provides better results than [27], [37], where coverage are around 0.38 and are less than [59]. In this latter case, where coverage slightly less than perfect for typical level of sparsity (Coverage: 99%), the dataset is more convenient to produce good results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%
“…Random prediction has a great probability of failure. Thus, it has never been taken seriously by any researcher or vendor and only serves as reference point1, helping to compare the quality of the results obtained by the utilization of a more sophisticated algorithm [15].…”
Section: Recommender System Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other recommender systems analyze the content to provide recommendations. The context aware recommender utilizes context data as an additional input to the recommendation task, alongside information of users and items [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24].…”
Section: Fig1: Family Watching Televisionmentioning
confidence: 99%