Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Revisiting Language Models in Neural News Recommender Systems

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 2501.11391 v1 pith:6QPPNDR4 submitted 2025-01-20 cs.IR

Revisiting Language Models in Neural News Recommender Systems

classification cs.IR
keywords newsperformancelanguagemodelslargerbetterplmsrecommendation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Neural news recommender systems (RSs) have integrated language models (LMs) to encode news articles with rich textual information into representations, thereby improving the recommendation process. Most studies suggest that (i) news RSs achieve better performance with larger pre-trained language models (PLMs) than shallow language models (SLMs), and (ii) that large language models (LLMs) outperform PLMs. However, other studies indicate that PLMs sometimes lead to worse performance than SLMs. Thus, it remains unclear whether using larger LMs consistently improves the performance of news RSs. In this paper, we revisit, unify, and extend these comparisons of the effectiveness of LMs in news RSs using the real-world MIND dataset. We find that (i) larger LMs do not necessarily translate to better performance in news RSs, and (ii) they require stricter fine-tuning hyperparameter selection and greater computational resources to achieve optimal recommendation performance than smaller LMs. On the positive side, our experiments show that larger LMs lead to better recommendation performance for cold-start users: they alleviate dependency on extensive user interaction history and make recommendations more reliant on the news content.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.