Paper detail

Learning Personalized Risk Preferences for Recommendation

The rapid growth of e-commerce has made people accustomed to shopping online. Before making purchases on e-commerce websites, most consumers tend to rely on rating scores and review information to make purchase decisions. With this information, they can infer the quality of products to reduce the risk of purchase. Specifically, items with high rating scores and good reviews tend to be less risky, while items with low rating scores and bad reviews might be risky to purchase. On the other hand, the purchase behaviors will also be influenced by consumers' tolerance of risks, known as the risk attitudes. Economists have studied risk attitudes for decades. These studies reveal that people are not always rational enough when making decisions, and their risk attitudes may vary in different circumstances. Most existing works over recommendation systems do not consider users' risk attitudes in modeling, which may lead to inappropriate recommendations to users. For example, suggesting a risky item to a risk-averse person or a conservative item to a risk-seeking person may result in the reduction of user experience. In this paper, we propose a novel risk-aware recommendation framework that integrates machine learning and behavioral economics to uncover the risk mechanism behind users' purchasing behaviors. Concretely, we first develop statistical methods to estimate the risk distribution of each item and then draw the Nobel-award winning Prospect Theory into our model to learn how users choose from probabilistic alternatives that involve risks, where the probabilities of the outcomes are uncertain. Experiments on several e-commerce datasets demonstrate that our approach can achieve better performance than many classical recommendation approaches, and further analyses also verify the advantages of risk-aware recommendation beyond accuracy.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.