mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On Estimating Recommendation Evaluation Metrics under Sampling

arXiv 2103.01474 ↗First posted 2 Mar 2021cs.IR cs.AI stat.MLcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Since the recent study (Krichene and Rendle 2020) done by Krichene and Rendle on the sampling-based top-k evaluation metric for recommendation, there has been a lot of debates on the validity of using sampling to evaluate recommendation algorithms. Though their work and the recent work (Li et al.2020) have proposed some basic approaches for mapping the sampling-based metrics to their global counterparts which rank the entire set of items, there is still a lack of understanding and consensus on how sampling should be used for recommendation evaluation. The proposed approaches either are rather uninformative (linking sampling to metric evaluation) or can only work on simple metrics, such as Recall/Precision (Krichene and Rendle 2020; Li et al. 2020). In this paper, we introduce a new research problem on learning the empirical rank distribution, and a new approach based on the estimated rank distribution, to estimate the top-k metrics. Since this question is closely related to the underlying mechanism of sampling for recommendation, tackling it can help better understand the power of sampling and can help resolve the questions of if and how should we use sampling for evaluating recommendation. We introduce two approaches based on MLE (MaximalLikelihood Estimation) and its weighted variants, and ME(Maximal Entropy) principals to recover the empirical rank distribution, and then utilize them for metrics estimation. The experimental results show the advantages of using the new approaches for evaluating recommendation algorithms based on top-k metrics.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Mar 2021.

Builds on

10 of 25 references.

References · 10

  1. 2017Neural Collaborative Filteringcited by 1,108
  2. 2018Variational Autoencoders for Collaborative Filteringcited by 308
  3. 2019Are We Really Making Much Progress? A Worrying Analysis of Recent Neural Recommendation Approachescited by 181
  4. 2018RSA: Byzantine-Robust Stochastic Aggregation Methods for Distributed Learning from Heterogeneous Datasetscited by 148
  5. 2019Embarrassingly Shallow Autoencoders for Sparse Datacited by 93
  6. 2020DeepRecSys: A System for Optimizing End-To-End At-scale Neural Recommendation Inferencecited by 54
  7. 2019On the Difficulty of Evaluating Baselines: A Study on Recommender Systemscited by 46
  8. 2018Collaborative Memory Network for Recommendation Systemscited by 30
  9. 2018Efficient Training on Very Large Corpora via Gramian Estimationcited by 9
  10. 2019Evaluation Metrics for Item Recommendation under Samplingcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 7; 2024: 0; 2025: 1.

8 papers.