TY - JOUR
T1 - On the Relationship between Explanation and Recommendation
T2 - Learning to Rank Explanations for Improved Performance
AU - Li, Lei
AU - Zhang, Yongfeng
AU - Chen, Li
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by Hong Kong RGC/GRF(RGC/HKBU12201620) and partially supported by NSFIIS-1910154, 2007907, and 2046457. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsors.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Association for Computing Machinery.
PY - 2023/4
Y1 - 2023/4
N2 - Explaining to users why some items are recommended is critical, as it can help users to make better decisions, increase their satisfaction, and gain their trust in recommender systems (RS). However, existing explainable RS usually consider explanation as a side output of the recommendation model, which has two problems: (1) It is difficult to evaluate the produced explanations, because they are usually model-dependent, and (2) as a result, how the explanations impact the recommendation performance is less investigated.In this article, explaining recommendations is formulated as a ranking task and learned from data, similarly to item ranking for recommendation. This makes it possible for standard evaluation of explanations via ranking metrics (e.g., Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain). Furthermore, this article extends traditional item ranking to an item-explanation joint-ranking formalization to study if purposely selecting explanations could reach certain learning goals, e.g., improving recommendation performance. A great challenge, however, is that the sparsity issue in the user-item-explanation data would be inevitably severer than that in traditional user-item interaction data, since not every user-item pair can be associated with all explanations. To mitigate this issue, this article proposes to perform two sets of matrix factorization by considering the ternary relationship as two groups of binary relationships. Experiments on three large datasets verify the solution's effectiveness on both explanation ranking and item recommendation.
AB - Explaining to users why some items are recommended is critical, as it can help users to make better decisions, increase their satisfaction, and gain their trust in recommender systems (RS). However, existing explainable RS usually consider explanation as a side output of the recommendation model, which has two problems: (1) It is difficult to evaluate the produced explanations, because they are usually model-dependent, and (2) as a result, how the explanations impact the recommendation performance is less investigated.In this article, explaining recommendations is formulated as a ranking task and learned from data, similarly to item ranking for recommendation. This makes it possible for standard evaluation of explanations via ranking metrics (e.g., Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain). Furthermore, this article extends traditional item ranking to an item-explanation joint-ranking formalization to study if purposely selecting explanations could reach certain learning goals, e.g., improving recommendation performance. A great challenge, however, is that the sparsity issue in the user-item-explanation data would be inevitably severer than that in traditional user-item interaction data, since not every user-item pair can be associated with all explanations. To mitigate this issue, this article proposes to perform two sets of matrix factorization by considering the ternary relationship as two groups of binary relationships. Experiments on three large datasets verify the solution's effectiveness on both explanation ranking and item recommendation.
KW - Explainable recommendation
KW - explanation ranking
KW - learning to explain
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85151896745&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1145/3569423
DO - 10.1145/3569423
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85151896745
SN - 2157-6904
VL - 14
JO - ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology
JF - ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology
IS - 2
M1 - 21
ER -