Biblio

In recommender systems based on low-rank factorization of a partially observed user-item matrix, a common phenomenon that plagues many otherwise effective models is the interleaving of good and spurious recommendations in the top-K results. A single spurious recommendation can dramatically impact the perceived quality of a recommender system. Spurious recommendations do not result in serendipitous discoveries but rather cognitive dissonance. In this work, we investigate folding, a major contributing factor to spurious recommendations. Folding refers to the unintentional overlap of disparate groups of users and items in the low-rank embedding vector space, induced by improper handling of missing data. We formally define a metric that quantifies the severity of folding in a trained system, to assist in diagnosing its potential to make inappropriate recommendations. The folding metric complements existing information retrieval metrics that focus on the number of good recommendations and their ranks but ignore the impact of undesired recommendations. We motivate the folding metric definition on synthetic data and evaluate its effectiveness on both synthetic and real world datasets. In studying the relationship between the folding metric and other characteristics of recommender systems, we observe that optimizing for goodness metrics can lead to high folding and thus more spurious recommendations.

One way of evaluating the reusability of a test collection is to determine whether removing the unique contributions of some system would alter the preference order between that system and others. Rank correlation measures such as Kendall's tau are often used for this purpose. Rank correlation measures are appropriate for ordinal measures in which only preference order is important, but many evaluation measures produce system scores in which both the preference order and the magnitude of the score difference are important. Such measures are referred to as interval. Pearson's rho offers one way in which correlation can be computed over results from an interval measure such that smaller errors in the gap size are preferred. When seeking to improve over existing systems, we care the most about comparisons among the best systems. For that purpose we prefer head-weighed measures such as tau\_AP, which is designed for ordinal data. No present head weighted measure fully leverages the information present in interval effectiveness measures. This paper introduces such a measure, referred to as Pearson Rank.