Understanding and Scaling Collaborative Filtering Optimization from the Perspective of Matrix Rank
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Collaborative Filtering (CF) methods dominate real-world recommender systems given their ability to learn high-quality, sparse ID-embedding tables that effectively capture user preferences. These tables scale linearly with the number of users and items, and are trained to ensure high similarity between embeddings of interacted user-item pairs, while maintaining low similarity for non-interacted pairs. Despite their high performance, encouraging dispersion for non-interacted pairs necessitates expensive regularization (e.g., negative sampling), hurting runtime and scalability. Existing research tends to address these challenges by simplifying the learning process, either by reducing model complexity or sampling data, trading performance for runtime. In this work, we move beyond model-level modifications and study the properties of the embedding tables under different learning strategies. Through theoretical analysis, we find that the singular values of the embedding tables are intrinsically linked to different CF loss functions. These findings are empirically validated on real-world datasets, demonstrating the practical benefits of higher stable rank, a continuous version of matrix rank which encodes the distribution of singular values. Based on these insights, we propose an efficient warm-start strategy that regularizes the stable rank of the user and item embeddings. We show that stable rank regularization during early training phases can promote higher-quality embeddings, resulting in training speed improvements of up to 66%. Additionally, stable rank regularization can act as a proxy for negative sampling, allowing for performance gains of up to 21% over loss functions with small negative sampling ratios. Overall, our analysis unifies current CF methods under a new perspective, their optimization of stable rank, motivating a flexible regularization method.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Oct 2024.
Builds on
18 of 48 references.
References · 18
- 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,777
- 2021Barlow Twins: Self-Supervised Learning via Redundancy Reductioncited by 1,838
- 2020LightGCN: Simplifying and Powering Graph Convolution Network for Recommendationcited by 1,139
- 2017Neural Collaborative Filteringcited by 1,111
- 2016Wide & Deep Learning for Recommender Systemscited by 747
- 2019Neural Graph Collaborative Filteringcited by 661
- 2020DCN V2: Improved Deep & Cross Network and Practical Lessons for Web-scale Learning to Rank Systemscited by 327
- 2021A Survey of Graph Neural Networks for Recommender Systems: Challenges, Methods, and Directionscited by 144
- 2017Deep Learning based Recommender System: A Survey and New Perspectivescited by 136
- 2022Towards Representation Alignment and Uniformity in Collaborative Filteringcited by 57
- 2023Amazon-M2: A Multilingual Multi-locale Shopping Session Dataset for Recommendation and Text Generationcited by 42
- 2022On the Effectiveness of Sampled Softmax Loss for Item Recommendationcited by 39
6 more
- 2015Addressing Complex and Subjective Product-Related Queries with Customer Reviewscited by 29
- 2023Going Beyond Local: Global Graph-Enhanced Personalized News Recommendationscited by 10
- 2023Towards Mitigating Dimensional Collapse of Representations in Collaborative Filteringcited by 10
- 2023Toward a Better Understanding of Loss Functions for Collaborative Filteringcited by 8
- 2023Revisiting Recommendation Loss Functions through Contrastive Learning (Technical Report)cited by 5
- 2024How Does Message Passing Improve Collaborative Filtering?cited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.