REVIEW 1 cited by
Contrastive Learning with Bidirectional Transformers for Sequential Recommendation
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Contrastive learning with Transformer-based sequence encoder has gained predominance for sequential recommendation. It maximizes the agreements between paired sequence augmentations that share similar semantics. However, existing contrastive learning approaches in sequential recommendation mainly center upon left-to-right unidirectional Transformers as base encoders, which are suboptimal for sequential recommendation because user behaviors may not be a rigid left-to-right sequence. To tackle that, we propose a novel framework named \textbf{C}ontrastive learning with \textbf{Bi}directional \textbf{T}ransformers for sequential recommendation (\textbf{CBiT}). Specifically, we first apply the slide window technique for long user sequences in bidirectional Transformers, which allows for a more fine-grained division of user sequences. Then we combine the cloze task mask and the dropout mask to generate high-quality positive samples and perform multi-pair contrastive learning, which demonstrates better performance and adaptability compared with the normal one-pair contrastive learning. Moreover, we introduce a novel dynamic loss reweighting strategy to balance between the cloze task loss and the contrastive loss. Experiment results on three public benchmark datasets show that our model outperforms state-of-the-art models for sequential recommendation.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Time to Split: Exploring Data Splitting Strategies for Offline Evaluation of Sequential Recommenders
Global temporal splits with Last or Random target selection correlate strongly with realistic successive evaluation, while leave-one-out splits produce inconsistent model rankings across datasets.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.