Abstract | ||
---|---|---|
In this paper, we describe and compare threeCollaborative Filtering (CF) algorithms aiming at the low-rank approximation of the user-item ratings matrix. The algorithm implementations are based on three standard techniques for fitting a factor model to the data: Standard Singular Value Decomposition (sSVD), Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Correspondence Analysis (CA). CA and PCA can be described as SVDs of appropriately transformed matrices,which is a key concept in this study. For each algorithm we implement two similar CF versions. The first one involves a direct rating prediction scheme based on the reduced user-item ratings matrix, while the second incorporates an additional neighborhood formation step. Next, we examine the impact of the aforementioned approaches on the quality of the generated predictions through a series of experiments. The experimental results showed that the approaches including the neighborhood formation step in most cases appear to be less accurate thanthe direct ones. Finally, CA-CF outperformed the SVD-CFand PCA-CF in terms of accuracy for small numbers ofretained dimensions, but SVD-CF displayed the overall highest accuracy. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
---|---|---|
2009 | 10.1109/BCI.2009.18 | BCI |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
approximation algorithms,factor model,collaboration,principal component analysis,prediction algorithms,groupware,singular value,correspondence analysis,singular value decomposition,low rank approximation,algorithm design and analysis,collaborative filtering,matrix decomposition,principal component | Approximation algorithm,Singular value decomposition,Collaborative filtering,Algorithm design,Matrix (mathematics),Computer science,Matrix decomposition,Algorithm,Low-rank approximation,Principal component analysis | Conference |
Citations | PageRank | References |
1 | 0.35 | 12 |
Authors | ||
3 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
---|---|---|---|
Manolis G. Vozalis | 1 | 60 | 5.53 |
Angelos I. Markos | 2 | 55 | 5.72 |
Konstantinos G. Margaritis | 3 | 303 | 45.46 |