mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

TEARS: Textual Representations for Scrutable Recommendations

arXiv 2410.19302 ↗First posted 25 Oct 2024cs.IR cs.AI cs.LGcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Traditional recommender systems rely on high-dimensional (latent) embeddings for modeling user-item interactions, often resulting in opaque representations that lack interpretability. Moreover, these systems offer limited control to users over their recommendations. Inspired by recent work, we introduce TExtuAl Representations for Scrutable recommendations (TEARS) to address these challenges. Instead of representing a user's interests through a latent embedding, TEARS encodes them in natural text, providing transparency and allowing users to edit them. To do so, TEARS uses a modern LLM to generate user summaries based on user preferences. We find the summaries capture user preferences uniquely. Using these summaries, we take a hybrid approach where we use an optimal transport procedure to align the summaries' representation with the learned representation of a standard VAE for collaborative filtering. We find this approach can surpass the performance of three popular VAE models while providing user-controllable recommendations. We also analyze the controllability of TEARS through three simulated user tasks to evaluate the effectiveness of a user editing its summary.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 62 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Oct 2024.

Builds on

29 of 62 references.

References · 29

  1. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  3. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  4. 2013Sinkhorn Distances: Lightspeed Computation of Optimal Transportation Distancescited by 2,277
  5. 2020LightGCN: Simplifying and Powering Graph Convolution Network for Recommendationcited by 1,134
  6. 2017Neural Collaborative Filteringcited by 1,108
  7. 2020Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 1,022
  8. 2019Neural Graph Collaborative Filteringcited by 660
  9. 2017Wasserstein GANcited by 635
  10. 2018Variational Autoencoders for Collaborative Filteringcited by 308
  11. 2023Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Rankers for Recommender Systemscited by 307
  12. 2023Chat-REC: Towards Interactive and Explainable LLMs-Augmented Recommender Systemcited by 241
17 more
  1. 2023Representation Learning with Large Language Models for Recommendationcited by 155
  2. 2023Large Language Models as Zero-Shot Conversational Recommenderscited by 126
  3. 2023How to Index Item IDs for Recommendation Foundation Modelscited by 102
  4. 2019Embarrassingly Shallow Autoencoders for Sparse Datacited by 93
  5. 2017Joint Deep Modeling of Users and Items Using Reviews for Recommendationcited by 84
  6. 2023Large Language Models are Competitive Near Cold-start Recommenders for Language- and Item-based Preferencescited by 66
  7. 2021Counterfactual Explainable Recommendationcited by 60
  8. 2023VIP5: Towards Multimodal Foundation Models for Recommendationcited by 45
  9. 2024Beyond Concept Bottleneck Models: How to Make Black Boxes Intervenable?cited by 28
  10. 2024Integrating Large Language Models into Recommendation via Mutual Augmentation and Adaptive Aggregationcited by 26
  11. 2024Transparent and Scrutable Recommendations Using Natural Language User Profilescited by 24
  12. 2023Explainable Recommendation with Personalized Review Retrieval and Aspect Learningcited by 19
  13. 2023Large Language Models are Not Stable Recommender Systemscited by 13
  14. 2024End-to-end Training for Recommendation with Language-based User Profilescited by 10
  15. 2023Recommendations by Concise User Profiles from Review Textcited by 5
  16. 2021A Comprehensive Overview of Recommender System and Sentiment Analysiscited by 3
  17. 2023KNNs of Semantic Encodings for Rating Predictioncited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 3.

5 papers.