If you recommend a product to me and I buy it, how much should you be paid by the seller? And if your sole interest is to maximize the amount paid to you by the seller for a sequence of recommendations, how should you recommend optimally if I become more inclined to ignore you with each irrelevant recommendation you make? Finding an answer to these questions is a key challenge in all forms of marketing that rely on and explore social ties; ranging from personal recommendations to viral marketing. In the first part of this paper, we show that there can be no pricing mechanism that is “truthful” with respect to the seller, and we use solution concepts from coalitional game theory, namely the Core, the Shapley Value, and the Nash Bargaining Solution, to derive provably “fair” prices for settings with one or multiple recommenders. We then investigate pricing mechanisms for the setting where recommenders have different “purchase arguments”. Here we show that it might be beneficial for the recommenders to withhold some of their arguments, unless anonymity-proof solution concepts, such as the anonymity-proof Shapley value, are used. In the second part of this paper, we analyze the setting where the recommendee loses trust in the recommender for each irrelevant recommendation. Here we prove that even if the recommendee regains her initial trust on each successful recommendation, the expected total profit the recommender can make over an infinite period is bounded. This can only be overcome when the recommendee also incrementally regains trust during periods without any recommendation. Here, we see an interesting connection to “banner blindness”, suggesting that showing fewer ads can lead to a higher long-term profit.
It should be clear that we are addressing the problem of to recommend, a problem typically encountered by stores such as Amazon and usually solved using collaborative filtering'' techniques @cite_19 @cite_21 . In the first part of this paper (), we assume that the recommender recommends an item because she believes this item to be of interest to the recommendee, and the algorithm used by her to determine potential interest is irrelevant. In the second part (), the recommender is profit maximizing and now only cares about the reward offered to her by the seller and the probability @math that the recommendee will buy the item. In this model the what'' is absorbed into @math and the recommender simply decides on to recommend.
@cite_19 @cite_21
2015290529 2159094788 2962847184 2169757306
Most of existing e-commerce recommender systems aim to recommend the right product to a user, based on whether the user is likely to purchase or like a product. On the other hand, the effectiveness of recommendations also depends on the time of the recommendation. Let us take a user who just purchased a laptop as an example. She may purchase a replacement battery in 2 years (assuming that the laptop's original battery often fails to work around that time) and purchase a new laptop in another 2 years. In this case, it is not a good idea to recommend a new laptop or a replacement battery right after the user purchased the new laptop. It could hurt the user's satisfaction of the recommender system if she receives a potentially right product recommendation at the wrong time. We argue that a system should not only recommend the most relevant item, but also recommend at the right time. This paper studies the new problem: how to recommend the right product at the right time? We adapt the proportional hazards modeling approach in survival analysis to the recommendation research field and propose a new opportunity model to explicitly incorporate time in an e-commerce recommender system. The new model estimates the joint probability of a user making a follow-up purchase of a particular product at a particular time. This joint purchase probability can be leveraged by recommender systems in various scenarios, including the zero-query pull-based recommendation scenario (e.g. recommendation on an e-commerce web site) and a proactive push-based promotion scenario (e.g. email or text message based marketing). We evaluate the opportunity modeling approach with multiple metrics. Experimental results on a data collected by a real-world e-commerce website(shop.com) show that it can predict a user's follow-up purchase behavior at a particular time with descent accuracy. In addition, the opportunity model significantly improves the conversion rate in pull-based systems and the user satisfaction utility in push-based systems. Recommendation algorithms are best known for their use on e-commerce Web sites, where they use input about a customer's interests to generate a list of recommended items. Many applications use only the items that customers purchase and explicitly rate to represent their interests, but they can also use other attributes, including items viewed, demographic data, subject interests, and favorite artists. At Amazon.com, we use recommendation algorithms to personalize the online store for each customer. The store radically changes based on customer interests, showing programming titles to a software engineer and baby toys to a new mother. There are three common approaches to solving the recommendation problem: traditional collaborative filtering, cluster models, and search-based methods. Here, we compare these methods with our algorithm, which we call item-to-item collaborative filtering. Unlike traditional collaborative filtering, our algorithm's online computation scales independently of the number of customers and number of items in the product catalog. Our algorithm produces recommendations in real-time, scales to massive data sets, and generates high quality recommendations. Most recommender systems recommend a list of items. The user examines the list, from the first item to the last, and often chooses the first attractive item and does not examine the rest. This type of user behavior can be modeled by the cascade model. In this work, we study cascading bandits, an online learning variant of the cascade model where the goal is to recommend K most attractive items from a large set of L candidate items. We propose two algorithms for solving this problem, which are based on the idea of linear generalization. The key idea in our solutions is that we learn a predictor of the attraction probabilities of items from their features, as opposing to learning the attraction probability of each item independently as in the existing work. This results in practical learning algorithms whose regret does not depend on the number of items L. We bound the regret of one algorithm and comprehensively evaluate the other on a range of recommendation problems. The algorithm performs well and outperforms all baselines. Recommender systems are being widely applied in many application settings to suggest products, services, and information items to potential consumers. Collaborative filtering, the most successful recommendation approach, makes recommendations based on past transactions and feedback from consumers sharing similar interests. A major problem limiting the usefulness of collaborative filtering is the sparsity problem, which refers to a situation in which transactional or feedback data is sparse and insufficient to identify similarities in consumer interests. In this article, we propose to deal with this sparsity problem by applying an associative retrieval framework and related spreading activation algorithms to explore transitive associations among consumers through their past transactions and feedback. Such transitive associations are a valuable source of information to help infer consumer interests and can be explored to deal with the sparsity problem. To evaluate the effectiveness of our approach, we have conducted an experimental study using a data set from an online bookstore. We experimented with three spreading activation algorithms including a constrained Leaky Capacitor algorithm, a branch-and-bound serial symbolic search algorithm, and a Hopfield net parallel relaxation search algorithm. These algorithms were compared with several collaborative filtering approaches that do not consider the transitive associations: a simple graph search approach, two variations of the user-based approach, and an item-based approach. Our experimental results indicate that spreading activation-based approaches significantly outperformed the other collaborative filtering methods as measured by recommendation precision, recall, the F-measure, and the rank score. We also observed the over-activation effect of the spreading activation approach, that is, incorporating transitive associations with past transactional data that is not sparse may "dilute" the data used to infer user preferences and lead to degradation in recommendation performance.