mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Disentangling Likes and Dislikes in Personalized Generative Explainable Recommendation

arXiv 2410.13248 ↗First posted 17 Oct 2024cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent research on explainable recommendation generally frames the task as a standard text generation problem, and evaluates models simply based on the textual similarity between the predicted and ground-truth explanations. However, this approach fails to consider one crucial aspect of the systems: whether their outputs accurately reflect the users' (post-purchase) sentiments, i.e., whether and why they would like and/or dislike the recommended items. To shed light on this issue, we introduce new datasets and evaluation methods that focus on the users' sentiments. Specifically, we construct the datasets by explicitly extracting users' positive and negative opinions from their post-purchase reviews using an LLM, and propose to evaluate systems based on whether the generated explanations 1) align well with the users' sentiments, and 2) accurately identify both positive and negative opinions of users on the target items. We benchmark several recent models on our datasets and demonstrate that achieving strong performance on existing metrics does not ensure that the generated explanations align well with the users' sentiments. Lastly, we find that existing models can provide more sentiment-aware explanations when the users' (predicted) ratings for the target items are directly fed into the models as input. The datasets and benchmark implementation are available at: https://github.com/jchanxtarov/sent_xrec.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 35 of its 72 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Oct 2024.

Builds on

35 of 72 references.

References · 35

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  3. 2014Empirical Evaluation of Gated Recurrent Neural Networks on Sequence Modelingcited by 2,341
  4. 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 729
  5. 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 724
  6. 2023Benchmarking Large Language Models for News Summarizationcited by 444
  7. 2022Recommendation as Language Processing (RLP): A Unified Pretrain, Personalized Prompt & Predict Paradigm (P5)cited by 396
  8. 2023A Survey on Large Language Models for Recommendationcited by 378
  9. 2023PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimizationcited by 311
  10. 2023Sentiment Analysis in the Era of Large Language Models: A Reality Checkcited by 262
  11. 2023Adapted Large Language Models Can Outperform Medical Experts in Clinical Text Summarizationcited by 244
  12. 2018Explainable Recommendation: A Survey and New Perspectivescited by 210
23 more
  1. 2023Is ChatGPT a Good Recommender? A Preliminary Studycited by 192
  2. 2013From Amateurs to Connoisseurs: Modeling the Evolution of User Expertise through Online Reviewscited by 107
  3. 2024FineSurE: Fine-grained Summarization Evaluation using LLMscited by 83
  4. 2022Personalized Prompt Learning for Explainable Recommendationcited by 79
  5. 2021Personalized Transformer for Explainable Recommendationcited by 58
  6. 2017Neural Rating Regression with Abstractive Tips Generation for Recommendationcited by 50
  7. 2022Prompted Opinion Summarization with GPT-3.5cited by 44
  8. 2022A Survey on Trustworthy Recommender Systemscited by 40
  9. 2024Revisiting Zero-Shot Abstractive Summarization in the Era of Large Language Models from the Perspective of Position Biascited by 28
  10. 2023Explainable Recommendation with Personalized Review Retrieval and Aspect Learningcited by 19
  11. 2024Large Language Models as Evaluators for Recommendation Explanationscited by 19
  12. 2023Towards Better Evaluation of Instruction-Following: A Case-Study in Summarizationcited by 18
  13. 2023Unlocking the Potential of Large Language Models for Explainable Recommendationscited by 18
  14. 2021Evaluating the Tradeoff Between Abstractiveness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 15
  15. 2022Measuring "Why" in Recommender Systems: a Comprehensive Survey on the Evaluation of Explainable Recommendationcited by 14
  16. 2022Factual and Informative Review Generation for Explainable Recommendationcited by 14
  17. 2024Improving Faithfulness of Large Language Models in Summarization via Sliding Generation and Self-Consistencycited by 14
  18. 2021Explanation as a Defense of Recommendationcited by 9
  19. 2021EXTRA: Explanation Ranking Datasets for Explainable Recommendationcited by 9
  20. 2022A Generative Language Model for Few-shot Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysiscited by 7
  21. 2023Knowledge-grounded Natural Language Recommendation Explanationcited by 4
  22. 2024Unlocking the `Why' of Buying: Introducing a New Dataset and Benchmark for Purchase Reason and Post-Purchase Experiencecited by 4
  23. 2024Aligning Explanations for Recommendation with Rating and Feature via Maximizing Mutual Informationcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

3 papers.