Performance Comparison of Combined Collaborative Filtering Algorithms for Recommender Systems
Loading...
Files
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Open Access Color
Green Open Access
Yes
OpenAIRE Downloads
OpenAIRE Views
Publicly Funded
No
Abstract
Recommender systems have a goal to make personalized recommendations by using filtering algorithms. Collaborative filtering (CF) is one of the most popular techniques for recommender systems. As usual, huge number of the datasets on the Internet increase the amount of time to work on data. This challenge enforces people to improve better algorithms for processing data with user preferences and recommending the most appropriate item to the users. In this paper, we analyze CF algorithms and present results for combined user-based/item-based CF algorithms for different size of datasets. Our goal is to show combined solution results using Loglikelihood, Spearman, Tanimoto and Pearson algorithms. The contribution is to describe which user based CF algorithms and user/item based combined CF algorithms perform better according to dataset, sparsity, execution time and k-neighborhood values. © 2012 IEEE.
Description
36th Annual IEEE International Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops, COMPSACW 2012; Izmir; Turkey; 16 July 2012 through 20 July 2012
Keywords
Recommender systems, Collaborative filtering, Algorithms, Data handling, Combined solution, Combined solution, Collaborative filtering, Recommender systems, Data handling, Algorithms
Fields of Science
0202 electrical engineering, electronic engineering, information engineering, 02 engineering and technology
Citation
Tapucu, D., Kasap, S., and Tekbacak, F. (2012, July 16-20). Performance comparison of combined collaborative filtering algorithms for recommender systems. Paper presented at the 36th Annual IEEE International Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops. doi:10.1109/COMPSACW.2012.59
WoS Q
Scopus Q

OpenCitations Citation Count
6
Volume
Issue
Start Page
284
End Page
289
PlumX Metrics
Citations
CrossRef : 1
Scopus : 5
Captures
Mendeley Readers : 14
Google Scholar™


