Paper detail

User Validation of Recommendation Serendipity Metrics

Though it has been recognized that recommending serendipitous (i.e., surprising and relevant) items can be helpful for increasing users' satisfaction and behavioral intention, how to measure serendipity in the offline environment is still an open issue. In recent years, a number of metrics have been proposed, but most of them were based on researchers' assumptions due to the serendipity's subjective nature. In order to validate these metrics' actual performance, we collected over 10,000 users' real feedback data and compared with the metrics' results. It turns out the user profile based metrics, especially content-based ones, perform better than those based on item popularity, in terms of estimating the unexpectedness facet of recommendations. Moreover, the full metrics, which involve the unexpectedness component, relevance, timeliness, and user curiosity, can more accurately indicate the recommendation's serendipity degree, relative to those that just involve some of them. The application of these metrics to several recommender algorithms further consolidates their practical usage, because the comparison results are consistent with those from user evaluation. Thus, this work is constructive for filling the gap between offline measurement and user study on recommendation serendipity.

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.

User Validation of Recommendation Serendipity Metrics | BZPEER | BZPEER