REVIEW 1 cited by
(Debiased) Contrastive Learning Loss for Recommendation (Technical Report)
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
In this paper, we perform a systemic examination of the recommendation losses, including listwise (softmax), pairwise(BPR), and pointwise (mean-squared error, MSE, and Cosine Contrastive Loss, CCL) losses through the lens of contrastive learning. We introduce and study both debiased InfoNCE and mutual information neural estimator (MINE), for the first time, under the recommendation setting. We also relate and differentiate these two losses with the BPR loss through the lower bound analysis. Furthermore, we present the debiased pointwise loss (for both MSE and CCL) and theoretically certify both iALS and EASE, two of the most popular linear models, are inherently debiased. The empirical experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the debiased losses and newly introduced mutual-information losses outperform the existing (biased) ones.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
PatchSeeker: Mapping NVD Records to their Vulnerability-fixing Commits with LLM Generated Commits and Embeddings
PatchSeeker maps NVD vulnerability records to their fixing commits by embedding CVE descriptions and LLM-generated commit summaries, outperforming prior tools by up to 59.3% in MRR and 27.9% in Recall@10.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.