Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Recommendation Model 3.1 Multi-Faceted Trust Model
Test Methodology
Dataset 1: Yelp
Dataset 2: Librarything
Experimental Results
Discussion
Conclusions
References

Multi-faceted Trust-based Collaborative Filtering

Profile image of Liliana ArdissonoLiliana Ardissono

2019, Proceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization - UMAP '19

https://doi.org/10.1145/3320435.3320441
visibility

…

description

9 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Many collaborative recommender systems leverage social correlation theories to improve suggestion performance. However, they focus on explicit relations between users and they leave out other types of information that can contribute to determine users' global reputation; e.g., public recognition of reviewers' quality. We are interested in understanding if and when these additional types of feedback improve Top-N recommendation. For this purpose, we propose a multi-faceted trust model to integrate local trust, represented by social links, with various types of global trust evidence provided by social networks. We aim at identifying general classes of data in order to make our model applicable to different case studies. Then, we test the model by applying it to a variant of User-to-User Collaborative filtering (U2UCF) which supports the fusion of rating similarity, local trust derived from social relations, and multi-faceted reputation for rating prediction. We test our model on two datasets: the Yelp one publishes generic friend relations between users but provides different types of trust feedback, including user profile endorsements. The LibraryThing dataset offers fewer types of feedback but it provides more selective friend relations aimed at content sharing. The results of our experiments show that, on the Yelp dataset, our model outperforms both U2UCF and state-of-the-art trust-based recommenders that only use rating similarity and social relations. Differently, in the LibraryThing dataset, the combination of social relations and rating similarity achieves the best results. The lesson we learn is that multi-faceted trust can be a valuable type of information for recommendation. However, before using it in an application domain, an analysis of the type and amount of available trust evidence has to be done to assess its real impact on recommendation performance.

Related papers

Trust-aware Recommendations
Christophe Courtin

2021 International Symposium on Electrical, Electronics and Information Engineering, 2021

When forming a work team, the choice of its members is a key step. We believe that a recommender system could help to select the members of a team by taking into account individual competences criteria, as well as the relationships between people. One important aspect of this relationship is the trust that members have with each other. However, this concept of trust remains difficult to be used because it is subject to many definitions and is complex to grasp. We try in this research to shed some light on the notion of trust. In particular, we study if there is a correspondence between a previously declared trust (off-line) and an actual trust put into practice during an experiment. To use the trust to recommend profiles of competences that stem from a wider and more reliable social network, we also investigate if the use of transitivity and reciprocity for trust makes sense.

View PDFchevron_right
Trust no one: Evaluating trust-based filtering for recommenders
Barry Smyth

2005

Abstract To be successful recommender systems must gain the trust of users. To do this they must demonstrate their ability to make reliable predictions. We argue that collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms can benefit from explicit models of trust to inform their predictions. We present one such model of trust along with a cost-benefit analysis that focuses on the classical trade-off that exists between recommendation coverage and prediction accuracy.

View PDFchevron_right
Trust as a Key to Improving Recommendation Systems
Lindsay Marshall

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2005

In this paper we propose a method that can be used to avoid the problem of sparsity in recommendation systems and thus to provide improved quality recommendations. The concept is based on the idea of using trust relationships to support the prediction of user preferences. We present the method as used in a centralized environment; we discuss its efficiency and compare its performance with other existing approaches. Finally we give a brief outline of the potential application of this approach to a decentralized environment.

View PDFchevron_right
Trust-Aware Recommender Systems
Paolo Massa

Proceedings of the 2007 ACM conference on …, 2007

View PDFchevron_right
Trust-aware Collaborative Filtering for Recommender Systems by Paolo Massa
Paolo Massa

Recommender Systems based on Collaborative Filtering suggest to users items they might like. However due to data sparsity of the input ratings matrix, the step of finding similar users often fails. We propose to replace this step with the use of a trust metric, an algorithm able to propagate trust over the trust network and to estimate a trust weight that can be used in place of the similarity weight. An empirical evaluation on Epinions.com dataset shows that Recommender Systems that make use of trust information are the most effective in term of accuracy while preserving a good coverage. This is especially evident on users who provided few ratings.

View PDFchevron_right
Enhancing the trust-based recommendation process with explicit distrust
Nele Verbiest

ACM Transactions on the Web, 2013

When a Web application with a built-in recommender offers a social networking component which enables its users to form a trust network, it can generate more personalized recommendations by combining user ratings with information from the trust network. These are the so-called trust-enhanced recommendation systems. While research on the incorporation of trust for recommendations is thriving, the potential of explicitly stated distrust remains almost unexplored. In this article, we introduce a distrust-enhanced recommendation algorithm which has its roots in Golbeck's trust-based weighted mean. Through experiments on a set of reviews from Epinions.com, we show that our new algorithm outperforms its standard trust-only counterpart with respect to accuracy, thereby demonstrating the positive effect that explicit distrust can have on trust-based recommendations.

View PDFchevron_right
Is trust robust?: an analysis of trust-based recommendation
Barry Smyth

2006

Abstract Systems that adapt to input from users are susceptible to attacks from those same users. Recommender systems are common targets for such attacks since there are financial, political and many other motivations for influencing the promotion or demotion of recommendable items [2]. Recent research has shown that incorporating trust and reputation models into the recommendation process can have a positive impact on the accuracy and robustness of recommendations.

View PDFchevron_right
A Trust-Based Collaborative Filtering Approach to Design Recommender Systems
Vineet Sejwal

International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications

Collaborative Filtering (CF) is one of the most frequently used recommendation techniques to design recommender systems that improve accuracy in terms of recommendation, coverage, and rating prediction. Although CF is a well-established and popular algorithm, it suffers with issues like black-box recommendation, data sparsity, cold-start, and limited content problems that hamper its performance. Moreover, CF is fragile and it is not suitable to find similar users. The existing literatures on CF show that integrating users' social information with a recommender system can handle the above-mentioned issues effectively. Recently, trustworthiness among users is considered as one such social information that has been successfully combined with CF to predict ratings of the unrated items. In this paper, we propose a trust-based recommender system, TrustRER, which integrates users' trusts into an existing user-based CF algorithm for rating prediction. It uses both ratings and textual information of the items to generate a trust network for users and derives the trust scores. For trust score, we have defined three novel trust statements based on user rating values, emotion values, and review helpfulness votes. To generate a trust network, we have used trust propagation metrics to compute trust scores between those users who are not directly connected. The proposed TrustRER is experimentally evaluated over three datasets related to movie, music, and hotel and restaurant domains, and it performs significantly better in comparison to nine standard baselines and one state-of-the-art recommendation method. TrustRER is also able to effectively deal with the cold-start problem because it improves the rating prediction accuracy for cold-start users in comparison to baselines and state-of-the-art method.

View PDFchevron_right
Hybridising Collaborative Filtering and Trust-Aware Recommender Systems
Azim Roussanaly

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies, 2012

Recommender systems (RS) aim to predict items that users would appreciate, over a list of items. In evaluation of recommender systems, two issues can be defined: accuracy of prediction which implies the satisfaction of the user, coverage which implies the percentage of satisfied users. Collaborative filtering (CF) is the master approach in this domain, but still has some weaknesses especially about coverage. Trust-aware approach is today another promising approach in RS within social environments, whose prediction exceeds the quality of (CF). In this paper we propose several strategies to hybridize those both approaches in order to improve prediction quality, in the term of accuracy and coverage.

View PDFchevron_right
Trust-Aware Bootstrapping of Recommender Systems
Paolo Massa

ECAI 2006 Workshop on Recommender Systems, 2006

View PDFchevron_right

References (51)

  1. Alfarez Abdul-Rahman and Stephen Hailes. 2000. Supporting Trust in Virtual Communities. In Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences-Volume 6 -Volume 6 (HICSS '00). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 6007-. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=820262.820322
  2. L.M. Aiello, A. Barrat, R. Schifanella, C. Cattuto, B. Markines, and F. Menczer. 2012. Friendship prediction and homophily in social media. ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB) 6, 2 (2012), art. 9.
  3. Airbnb. 1999. Airbnb. https://airbnb.com.
  4. S. Alotaibi and J. Vassileva. 2016. Personalized Recommendation of Research Papers by Fusing Recommendations from Explicit and Implicit Social Networks. In Proc. of IFUP 2016: Workshop on Multi-dimensional Information Fusion for User Modeling and Personalization, Vol. 1618. CEUR, Halifax, Canada, paper 2.
  5. Liliana Ardissono, Maurizio Ferrero, Giovanna Petrone, and Marino Segnan. 2017. Enhancing Collaborative Filtering with Friendship Information. In Proceedings of the 25th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (UMAP '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 353-354. https://doi.org/10.1145/3079628.3079629
  6. Booking.com. [n. d.].
  7. Booking.com. https://www.booking.com.
  8. K. Bradley and B. Smyth. 2001. Improving Recommendation Diversity. In Proc. of the 12th National Conference in Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science, Diarmuid O'Donoghue (Ed.). Maynooth, Ireland, 75-84.
  9. Coder-Yu. 2019. Locabal.py. https://github.com/Coder-Yu/RecQ/blob/master/ algorithm/rating/LOCABAL.py.
  10. C. Desrosiers and G. Karypis. 2011. A Comprehensive Survey of Neighborhood- based Recommendation Methods. In Recommender systems handbook, F. Ricci, L. Rokach, B. Shapira, and P.B. Kantor (Eds.). Springer, 107-144.
  11. Xixi Du, Huafeng Liu, and Liping Jing. 2017. Additive Co-Clustering with Social Influence for Recommendation. In Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (RecSys '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 193-200. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3109859.3109883
  12. Expedia.com. 2001. Expedia. http://www.expedia.com.
  13. Diego Gambetta. 1988. Can We Trust Trust? In Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Diego Gambetta (Ed.). Blackwell, 213-237.
  14. Jennifer Golbeck and James Hendler. 2004. Accuracy of Metrics for Inferring Trust and Reputation in Semantic Web-Based Social Networks. In Engineering Knowledge in the Age of the Semantic Web, Enrico Motta, Nigel R. Shadbolt, Arthur Stutt, and Nick Gibbins (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 116-131.
  15. Georg Groh and Christian Ehmig. 2007. Recommendations in Taste Related Domains: Collaborative Filtering vs. Social Filtering. In Proceedings of the 2007 International ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP '07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 127-136. https://doi.org/10.1145/1316624.1316643
  16. G. Guo. 2019. LibRec -Exploration makes surprise -A Leading Java Library for Recommender Systems. www.librec.net.
  17. Guibing Guo, Jie Zhang, and Neil Yorke-Smith. 2015. TrustSVD: Collaborative Filtering with Both the Explicit and Implicit Influence of User Trust and of Item Ratings. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'15). AAAI Press, 123-129. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id= 2887007.2887025
  18. Nicolas Hug. 2018. Surprise, a Python library for recommender systems. http: //surpriselib.com.
  19. Mohsen Jamali and Martin Ester. 2010. A Matrix Factorization Technique with Trust Propagation for Recommendation in Social Networks. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (RecSys '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 135-142. https://doi.org/10.1145/1864708.1864736
  20. Meng Jiang, Peng Cui, Rui Liu, Qiang Yang, Fei Wang, Wenwu Zhu, and Shiqiang Yang. 2012. Social Contextual Recommendation. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 45-54. https://doi.org/10.1145/2396761.2396771
  21. Audun Jøsang. 2012. Robustness of Trust and Reputation Systems: Does It Matter?. In Trust Management VI, Theo Dimitrakos, Rajat Moona, Dhiren Patel, and D. Harrison McKnight (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 253-262.
  22. Audun Jøsang and Jennifer Goldbeck. 2009. Challenges for robust trust and reputation systems. In 5th Int. workshop on Security and trust management (STM 2009). Saint Malo, France.
  23. Audun Jøsang, Roslan Ismail, and Colin Boyd. 2007. A Survey of Trust and Reputation Systems for Online Service Provision. Decis. Support Syst. 43, 2 (March 2007), 618-644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.019
  24. Ioannis Konstas, Vassilios Stathopoulos, and Joemon M. Jose. 2009. On Social Networks and Collaborative Recommendation. In Proceedings of the 32Nd In- ternational ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 195-202. https://doi.org/10. 1145/1571941.1571977
  25. Yehuda Koren. 2008. Factorization Meets the Neighborhood: A Multifaceted Col- laborative Filtering Model. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 426-434. https://doi.org/10.1145/1401890.1401944
  26. Xiaoming Li, Hui Fang, Qing Yang, and Jie Zhang. 2018. Who is Your Best Friend?: Ranking Social Network Friends According to Trust Relationship. In Proceedings of the 26th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (UMAP '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 301-309. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209219.3209243
  27. LibraryThing. [n. d.].
  28. LibraryThing -a home for your books. https://www. librarything.com.
  29. Fengkun Liu and Hong Joo Lee. 2010. Use of Social Network Information to Enhance Collaborative Filtering Performance. Expert Syst. Appl. 37, 7 (July 2010), 4772-4778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.12.061
  30. Xin Liu and Karl Aberer. 2013. SoCo: A Social Network Aided Context-aware Recommender System. In Proceedings of the 22Nd International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 781-802. https://doi. org/10.1145/2488388.2488457
  31. Hao Ma, Irwin King, and Michael R. Lyu. 2011. Learning to Recommend with Explicit and Implicit Social Relations. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 2, 3, Article 29 (May 2011), 19 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/1961189.1961201
  32. Hao Ma, Dengyong Zhou, Chao Liu, Michael R. Lyu, and Irwin King. 2011. Recommender Systems with Social Regularization. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 287-296. https://doi.org/10.1145/1935826.1935877
  33. P.V. Marsden and N.E. Friedkin. 1993. Network Studies of Social Influence. Sociological Methods & Research 22, 1 (1993), 127-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0049124193022001006 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124193022001006
  34. Paolo Massa and Paolo Avesani. 2007. Trust-aware Recommender Systems. In Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (RecSys '07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 17-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/1297231.1297235
  35. Kevin Mcnally, Michael P. O'Mahony, and Barry Smyth. 2014. A Comparative Study of Collaboration-based Reputation Models for Social Recommender Sys- tems. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 24, 3 (Aug. 2014), 219-260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-013-9143-6
  36. M. McPherson, L. Smith-Lovin, and J. Cook. 2001. Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annual review of sociology 27 (2001), 415-444.
  37. B. Misztal. 1996. Trust in modern societies. Polity Press, Cambridge, MA.
  38. John O'Donovan and Barry Smyth. 2005. Trust in Recommender Systems. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 167-174. https://doi.org/10.1145/1040830.1040870
  39. Lawrence Page, Sergey Brin, Rajeev Motwani, and Terry Winograd. 1999. The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web. Technical Report 1999- 66. Stanford InfoLab. http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/422/ Previous number = SIDL-WP-1999-0120.
  40. F. Qian, S. Zhao, J. Tang, and Y. Zhang. 2016. SoRS: Social recommendation using global rating reputation and local rating similarity. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 461, November (2016), 61-72.
  41. Dimitrios Rafailidis and Fabio Crestani. 2017. Learning to Rank with Trust and Distrust in Recommender Systems. In Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (RecSys '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5-13. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3109859.3109879
  42. Christian Richthammer, Michael Weber, and Günther Pernul. 2017. Reputation- Enhanced Recommender Systems. In Trust Management XI, Jan-Philipp Steghöfer and Babak Esfandiari (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 163-179.
  43. Kai Su, Bin Xiao, Baoping Liu, Huaiqiang Zhang, and Zongsheng Zhang. 2017. TAP: A personalized trust-aware QoS prediction approach for web service rec- ommendation. Knowledge-Based Systems 115 (2017), 55 -65. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.knosys.2016.09.033
  44. Jiliang Tang, Xia Hu, Huiji Gao, and Huan Liu. 2013. Exploiting Local and Global Social Context for Recommendation. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '13). AAAI Press, 2712-2718. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2540128.2540519
  45. P. Victor, C. Cornelis, M. De Cock, and A.M Teredesai. 2011. Trust-and Distrust- Based Recommendations for Controversial Reviews. IEEE Intelligent Systems 26, 1 (2011), 48-55.
  46. B. Yang, Y. Lei, J. Liu, and W. Li. 2017. Social collaborative filtering by trust. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 39, 8 (2017), 1633-1647.
  47. Xiwang Yang, Harald Steck, and Yong Liu. 2012. Circle-based Recommendation in Online Social Networks. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1267-1275. https://doi.org/10.1145/2339530.2339728
  48. Yelp Dataset Challenge. https://www.yelp.com/dataset_challenge.
  49. Quan Yuan, Li Chen, and Shiwan Zhao. 2011. Factorization vs. Regularization: Fusing Heterogeneous Social Relationships in Top-n Recommendation. In Pro- ceedings of the Fifth ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (RecSys '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 245-252. https://doi.org/10.1145/2043932.2043975
  50. Tong Zhao, Julian McAuley, and Irwin King. 2015. Improving Latent Factor Models via Personalized Feature Projection for One Class Recommendation. In Proc. of the 24th ACM Int. Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 821-830. https://doi.org/10.1145/2806416.2806511
  51. T. Zhao, J. McAuley, and I. King. 2019. LibraryThing Dataset. http://deepx.ucsd. edu/datasets/librarything/lthing_data.tar.gz.

Related papers

Trust-Based Recommendation: an Empirical Analysis
Peter Van Roy

2012

The use of trust in recommender systems has been shown to improve the accuracy of rating predictions, especially in the case where a user's rating significantly differs from the average. Different techniques have been used to incorporate trust into recommender systems, each showing encouraging results. However, the lack of trust information available in public datasets has limited the empirical analysis of these techniques and trust-based recommendation in general, with most analysis limited a single dataset. In this paper, we provide a more complete empirical analysis of trust-based recommendation. By making use of a method that infers trust between users in a social graph, we are able to apply trust-based recommendation techniques to three separate datasets. From this, we measure the overall accuracy of each technique in terms of the Mean Absolute Error (MAE), the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) as well as measuring the prediction coverage of each technique. We thus provide a comparison and analysis of each technique on all three datasets.

View PDFchevron_right
Using Trust In Recommender Systems: An Experimental Analysis. Itrust 2004
Paolo Massa

Lecture Notes in Computer Sciencel

View PDFchevron_right
Using Trust in Recommender Systems: an Experimental Analysis by Paolo Massa, Bobby Bhattacharjee Published
Paolo Massa

Recommender systems (RS) have been used for suggesting items (movies, books, songs, etc.) that users might like. RSs compute a user similarity between users and use it as a weight for the users' ratings. However they have many weaknesses, such as sparseness, cold start and vulnerability to attacks. We assert that these weaknesses can be alleviated using a Trust-aware system that takes into account the "web of trust" provided by every user. Specifically, we analyze data from the popular Internet web site epinions.com. The dataset consists of 49290 users who expressed reviews (with rating) on items and explicitly specified their web of trust, i.e. users whose reviews they have consistently found to be valuable. We show that any two users have usually few items rated in common. For this reason, the classic RS technique is often ineffective and is not able to compute a user similarity weight for many of the users. Instead exploiting the webs of trust, it is possible to propagate trust and infer an additional weight for other users. We show how this quantity can be computed against a larger number of users.

View PDFchevron_right
Using Trust In Recommender Systems: An Experimental Analysis
Paolo Massa

Trust Management, 2004

View PDFchevron_right
Trust-Aware Collaborative Filtering for Recommender Systems
Paolo Massa

On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2004: …, 2004

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved