User response to two algorithms as a test of collaborative filtering

A. Shearer
{"title":"User response to two algorithms as a test of collaborative filtering","authors":"A. Shearer","doi":"10.1145/634067.634328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether recommendations based on collaborative filtering (CF) are perceived as superior to recommendations based on user population averages. The test vehicle was a movie recommender. 29 subjects were divided into 2 groups, each group using one of these systems. The recommneder systems suggested movies which subjects later viewed. Each subject filled out pre and post-questionnaires about their experience. Subjects using the CF algorithm rated more movies. Subjects placed slightly more confidence in the recommendations of the population averages algorithm. Both algorithms were over-confident compared to subjects ratings. Subjects found both recommender systems to be an effective source of finding entertainment. User responses did not reveal a noticeable difference between the two algorithms.","PeriodicalId":351792,"journal":{"name":"CHI '01 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHI '01 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/634067.634328","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether recommendations based on collaborative filtering (CF) are perceived as superior to recommendations based on user population averages. The test vehicle was a movie recommender. 29 subjects were divided into 2 groups, each group using one of these systems. The recommneder systems suggested movies which subjects later viewed. Each subject filled out pre and post-questionnaires about their experience. Subjects using the CF algorithm rated more movies. Subjects placed slightly more confidence in the recommendations of the population averages algorithm. Both algorithms were over-confident compared to subjects ratings. Subjects found both recommender systems to be an effective source of finding entertainment. User responses did not reveal a noticeable difference between the two algorithms.
用户对两种算法的响应作为协同过滤的测试
本实验的目的是确定基于协同过滤(CF)的推荐是否被认为优于基于用户群体平均水平的推荐。测试飞行器是一部电影推荐机。29名受试者被分为两组,每组使用其中一种系统。推荐系统会推荐受试者随后观看的电影。每个受试者都填写了关于他们经历的前后问卷。使用CF算法的受试者给更多的电影打分。受试者对总体平均算法的建议更有信心。与受试者评分相比,这两种算法都过于自信。研究对象发现,这两种推荐系统都是寻找娱乐的有效来源。用户的反应并没有显示出两种算法之间的显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信