skip to main content
10.1145/2983323.2983889acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Regularising Factorised Models for Venue Recommendation using Friends and their Comments

Published:24 October 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Venue recommendation is an important capability of Location-Based Social Networks such as Yelp and Foursquare. Matrix Factorisation (MF) is a collaborative filtering-based approach that can effectively recommend venues that are relevant to the users' preferences, by training upon either implicit or explicit feedbacks (e.g. check-ins or venue ratings) that these users express about venues. However, MF suffers in that users may only have rated very few venues. To alleviate this problem, recent literature have leveraged additional sources of evidence, e.g. using users' social friendships to reduce the complexity of - or regularise - the MF model, or identifying similar venues based on their comments. This paper argues for a combined regularisation model, where the venues suggested for a user are influenced by friends with similar tastes (as defined by their comments). We propose a MF regularisation technique that seamlessly incorporates both social network information and textual comments, by exploiting word embeddings to estimate a semantic similarity of friends based on their explicit textual feedback, to regularise the complexity of the factorised model. Experiments on a large existing dataset demonstrate that our proposed regularisation model is promising, and can enhance the prediction accuracy of several state-of-the-art matrix factorisation-based approaches.

References

  1. X. Fu and X. Li. From movie reviews to restaurants recommendation. Technical report, Stanford University, 2015. http://stanford.io/2aB0T0f.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. G. Guo, J. Zhang, Z. Sun, and N. Yorke-Smith. LibRec: A Java library for recommender systems. In Proc. of UMAP, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. G. Guo, J. Zhang, and N. Yorke-Smith. A novel Bayesian similarity measure for recommender systems. In Proc. of IJCAI, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. G. Guo, J. Zhang, and N. Yorke-Smith. TrustSVD: Collaborative filtering with both the explicit and implicit influence of user trust and of item ratings. In Proc. of AAAI, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. L. Hu, A. Sun, and Y. Liu. Your neighbors affect your ratings: on geographical neighborhood influence to rating prediction. In Proc. of SIGIR, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. J. Huang, S. Rogers, and E. Joo. Improving restaurants by extracting subtopics from Yelp reviews. iConference (Social Media Expo), 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Y. Koren. Factorization meets the neighborhood: a multifaceted collaborative filtering model. In Proc. of SIGKDD, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Y. Koren. Factor in the neighbors: Scalable and accurate collaborative filtering. Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (TKDD), 4(1), 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. D. D. Lee and H. S. Seung. Learning the parts of objects by non-negative matrix factorization. Nature, 401(6755), 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. H. Ma, D. Zhou, C. Liu, M. R. Lyu, and I. King. Recommender systems with social regularization. In Proc. of WSDM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. T. Mikolov, K. Chen, G. Corrado, and J. Dean. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv:1301.3781, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. T. Mikolov, I. Sutskever, K. Chen, G. S. Corrado, and J. Dean. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In Proc. of NIPS, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. C. Musto, G. Semeraro, M. De Gemmis, and P. Lops. Word embedding techniques for content-based recommender systems: an empirical evaluation. In Proc. of RecSys, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. M. G. Ozsoy. From word embeddings to item recommendation. arXiv:1601.01356, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. R. Salakhutdinov and A. Mnih. Bayesian probabilistic matrix factorization using Markov chain Monte Carlo. In Proc. of ICML, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Regularising Factorised Models for Venue Recommendation using Friends and their Comments

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CIKM '16: Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
          October 2016
          2566 pages
          ISBN:9781450340731
          DOI:10.1145/2983323

          Copyright © 2016 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 24 October 2016

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • short-paper

          Acceptance Rates

          CIKM '16 Paper Acceptance Rate160of701submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate1,861of8,427submissions,22%

          Upcoming Conference

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader