Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Improving Conversational Recommendation Systems via Bias Analysis and Language-Model-Enhanced Data Augmentation

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

arxiv 2310.16738 v1 pith:DAV2UTJK submitted 2023-10-25 cs.CL cs.IR

classification cs.CLcs.IR
keywords dataaugmentationbiasbiasesconversationalrecommendationtechniquesbenchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Conversational Recommendation System (CRS) is a rapidly growing research area that has gained significant attention alongside advancements in language modelling techniques. However, the current state of conversational recommendation faces numerous challenges due to its relative novelty and limited existing contributions. In this study, we delve into benchmark datasets for developing CRS models and address potential biases arising from the feedback loop inherent in multi-turn interactions, including selection bias and multiple popularity bias variants. Drawing inspiration from the success of generative data via using language models and data augmentation techniques, we present two novel strategies, 'Once-Aug' and 'PopNudge', to enhance model performance while mitigating biases. Through extensive experiments on ReDial and TG-ReDial benchmark datasets, we show a consistent improvement of CRS techniques with our data augmentation approaches and offer additional insights on addressing multiple newly formulated biases.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The Decoy Dilemma in Online Medical Information Evaluation: A Comparative Study of Credibility Assessments by LLM and Human Judges

    cs.IR 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Large language models show stronger decoy-effect bias than human judges when rating the credibility of medical web pages in COVID-19 treatment searches.

Pith tools