Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 60 references

Dynamic QoS Prediction via a Non-Negative Tensor Snowflake Factorization

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A snowflake-structured tensor core, trained with nonnegative multiplicative updates, predicts missing QoS values with lower MAE and RMSE than CP-SGD, NNCP, and CTF on all four WS-DREAM splits.

desk verdict A plausible tensor-factorization variant whose empirical claim is too thinly supported by 0.1% margins and no error bars, but concrete enough to warrant referee attention with a demand for code and variance estimates. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18588 v1 pith:KNQZHS6V submitted 2025-04-24 cs.LG cs.AI

YongHui Xia , Lan Wang , Hao Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords QoSpredictiontensorfactorizationnon-negativeconstraintmultiplicativeupdatesnowflakecorecompletionWS-DREAMdynamicdata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes the Non-negative Snowflake Factorization of Tensors (NSFT) model for predicting missing quality-of-service (QoS) values in sparse user-service-time tensors. The central idea is to give the factorization a snowflake-shaped core tensor, a set of nonnegative coupling weights that tie user, service, and time latent factors together in several rank-one products per component, and to learn all parameters with a multiplicative update rule that preserves non-negativity. On WS-DREAM response-time and throughput data split into four configurations, NSFT reports lower mean absolute error and lower root mean square error than the CP-SGD, NNCP, and CTF baselines. If the claim holds, service recommendation systems can fill in unobserved QoS entries more accurately from historical logs, without additional data collection.

What carries the argument

The central object is the snowflake core tensor: a structured set of nonnegative coupling tensors that, instead of one shared core, provides several rank-one interaction terms per latent component to connect the user, service, and time modes. It is paired with the SLF-NMUT learning rule, a single-latent-factor nonnegative multiplicative update in which the learning rates are set so that negative gradient contributions cancel, keeping all latent factors and core entries nonnegative. This machinery lets the model fit sparse QoS tensors with a Euclidean loss while preserving the nonnegativity of response time and throughput data.

What would settle it

Implement the printed update equations exactly and run the four WS-DREAM splits with the same train/validation/test masks; if validation loss does not decrease monotonically or test MAE and RMSE deviate beyond a small tolerance from Table III, the central claim fails. A cheaper check is a synthetic tensor with known factors: if the snowflake-core objective does not decrease at every iteration, the update rules are not minimizing the stated loss.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that a tensor factorization with a snowflake-structured core learns dynamic user-service-time patterns better than conventional low-rank tensor completion. In the model, each latent component contributes several nonnegative products of user, service, and time latent vectors, with the interaction weights stored in the snowflake core tensor; linear bias vectors for users, services, and time slices are added to absorb level shifts. Parameters are fit by minimizing a Tikhonov-regularized Euclidean loss, and the SLF-NMUT scheme converts gradient descent into nonnegative multiplicative updates by choosing learning rates that cancel negative gradient terms. On the WS-DREAM datasets, the authors report that NSFT achieves lower MAE and RMSE than CP-SGD, NNCP, and CTF on all four splits, for example an MAE of 1.4315 versus 1.4331 for the closest baseline on D1, and interpret this as evidence that the snowflake core adds useful modeling capacity for incomplete dynamic QoS tensors.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's accuracy claim rests on the multiplicative update rules in Section 3.2 actually driving the regularized loss down while keeping every factor nonnegative; if those update equations are not correct or stable, the reported MAE and RMSE values would not be reproducible.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On WS-DREAM, NSFT produces lower MAE and RMSE than CP-SGD, NNCP, and CTF across all four train/validation/test splits, so it can be used as a drop-in completion model for response-time and throughput data.
  • Because the model maintains nonnegativity through multiplicative updates, it can be trained on the large, sparse QoS tensors without resorting to projected-gradient or ADMM solvers.
  • The reported robustness under increasing missing-entry ratios implies NSFT stays accurate when the observed fraction of the tensor is low.
  • The snowflake core enriches the interaction structure of a low-rank completion model, which the authors take as evidence that such structured cores improve dynamic QoS prediction.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The reported improvements over NNCP and CTF are small on most splits, so without repeated-run standard deviations or significance tests the 'consistently outperforms' claim may be within noise; a multi-seed replication would settle that.
  • The snowflake core is an architectural choice independent of QoS, so applying the same factorization to traffic recovery, network link prediction, or recommender tensors would test whether the structure, rather than the dataset, drives the accuracy gain.
  • An ablation that replaces the snowflake core with a single diagonal core while keeping the SLF-NMUT updates would isolate how much of the gain comes from the core shape versus the update rule.
  • The paper gives no explicit values for rank R, factor count F, or regularization coefficients, so releasing those settings is the minimal step needed to turn the reported numbers into a reproducible baseline for later work.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a Non-negative Snowflake Factorization of Tensors (NSFT) model for predicting missing QoS values in user-service-time tensors. The model introduces a 'snowflake core tensor' to capture latent interactions and learns parameters via non-negative multiplicative updates (SLF-NMUT), including bias terms and Tikhonov regularization. Experiments on two WS-DREAM datasets (response time and throughput) with four train/validation/test splits compare NSFT against three tensor factorization baselines (CP-SGD, NNCP, CTF) and report lower MAE and RMSE for NSFT on all splits. The paper claims that NSFT consistently outperforms the baselines and offers better interpretability and generalization for dynamic QoS prediction.

Significance. If the reported empirical claim were substantiated, the contribution would be a modest but useful addition to the literature on non-negative tensor factorization for QoS prediction. The paper correctly evaluates on held-out test splits, so the central comparison is not circular. The authors also address a practically relevant problem and provide a schematic model design. However, the significance is limited by the absence of variance estimates, the tiny reported advantages over one baseline on two splits, and the lack of reproducible algorithmic details. No code, no convergence analysis, and no statistical tests are provided, so the current evidence does not establish that NSFT is reliably better than a strong baseline such as CTF.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.3, Table III] The empirical claim that NSFT 'consistently outperforms' the baselines rests on differences as small as 0.1% (e.g., D1 MAE: M3 1.4331 vs M4 1.4315; D2 RMSE: M3 3.0789 vs M4 3.0704). The paper reports a single run per method with no standard deviations, seeds, repeated initializations, or paired significance tests, and it does not state how hyperparameters (ranks R and F, regularization coefficients, learning rates, iteration counts) were selected. Run-to-run or configuration variability of this magnitude could reverse the ranking; please provide variance estimates or paired comparisons and full hyperparameter settings for all methods.
  2. [Section 3.2, Eqs. (10)-(12)] The multiplicative update rules are not presented in a verifiable form. The definition of β in Eq. (12) contains mixed subscripts and superscripts and is garbled; the relationship between the learning rates in Eq. (11) and the cancellation of 'negative components' is asserted rather than derived; and no monotonicity or convergence guarantee is given for the regularized square loss with the snowflake core. Since these updates are the basis of SLF-NMUT and of the experimental results, the derivation must be rewritten with all index ranges and definitions, and ideally with a convergence proof or a complete reference to one.
  3. [Section 4.1, 4.2] The train/validation/test splits D1-D4 are defined only by the ratio (1:2:7 or 2:2:6). It is not stated whether the split is random or along the time dimension, so it is unclear whether the evaluation tests temporal generalization, which is central to a 'dynamic QoS' model. Also, the convergence criterion in Section 4.2 is incomplete: the text says 'the difference in validation errors between successive iterations drops below.' with no threshold value. Please specify the splitting scheme, the convergence threshold, and all hyperparameter values.
  4. [Section 4.3, baseline descriptions] The baseline citations do not match the named methods: reference [34] is 'Biased multiobjective optimization and decomposition algorithm', [28] is a PID-incorporated latent factorization paper, and [5] is 'Outlier-resilient web service QoS prediction'; none is clearly CP-SGD, NNCP, or CTF. Without correct references or implementation descriptions, the comparison cannot be reproduced. Please provide accurate citations and implementation details for each baseline.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 3.1, Eq. numbering] Equation (5) is referenced in the text but not displayed; the numbering jumps from (4) to (6). Please renumber and ensure all referenced equations are present.
  2. [Section 3.1, Eq. (2)] The notation for the snowflake core tensor is not defined symbolically in a separate equation; the τ and γ sub/superscripts in Eq. (2) are unexplained. A clear definition of all symbols and index ranges is needed.
  3. [Section 3.2, Eq. (11)] Only the learning rates η_g and η_i are specified; the learning rate η_ir for the latent factor U is never defined, although the update for u_ir is given in Eq. (12).
  4. [Section 4.1, Table I] The text states that 'QoS entries equating to zero are excluded from the assessment' but does not explain how zeros are handled in the observed set Λ. Please clarify whether zero is treated as missing or as a valid observed value.
  5. [Section 5, Conclusion] The conclusion claims reduced computational complexity and training costs, but no complexity analysis or runtime measurements are presented anywhere in the paper.
  6. [References] Several references are duplicated in the list (e.g., [25] and [40] are the same paper; [36] and [44] are the same paper). Please deduplicate and renumber.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the empirical claim is tested on held-out splits and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that the NSFT model yields lower MAE and RMSE than CP-SGD, NNCP, and CTF on the WS-DREAM datasets. The evaluation uses explicit train/validation/test partitions (Table II, D1-D4) and reports metrics computed only on the test entries (Eq. 13). The model parameters are learned from the observed training entries through the regularized objective in Eq. (9) and the multiplicative update rules in Eq. (12); the test-set metrics are not used in that objective or in the update derivation. There is no equation in which a predicted quantity is defined in terms of the benchmark metric, and no fitted parameter is presented as a prediction. The paper does rely on prior non-negative latent factorization work from the same research group (e.g., refs. [4], [28], [36]) to motivate SLF-NMUT, but those citations support the general algorithmic strategy and are not invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as external proof of the reported numbers. The garbled equations, missing convergence threshold, absent hyperparameters, and lack of error bars are serious reproducibility and correctness concerns, but they are not circularity: they concern whether the claimed empirical superiority would replicate, not whether the result is equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the optimization being correct and the dataset evaluation being unbiased. The paper provides a regularized Euclidean objective, but the detailed derivation is not legible and the key hyperparameters are absent. The non-negativity assumption is natural for the data. The snowflake core tensor is a novel structural choice that has no independent validation outside the reported experiments.

free parameters (3)
  • latent ranks R and F = not reported
    These determine the capacity of the snowflake core tensor in Eq. (2); no values are given, and the reported results cannot be reproduced without them.
  • regularization coefficients (lambda_g, lambda_b, lambda_c) = not reported
    Used in the objective Eq. (9) and update rules; values are not stated, though the results likely depend on them.
  • convergence threshold = not reported
    Section 4.2 says convergence is assumed when validation error changes drop below a threshold, but the threshold value is missing.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption QoS data are non-negative real numbers
    Stated in Section 2.1; the model enforces non-negativity, which is reasonable for response time and throughput but excludes valid zero entries.
  • domain assumption A low-rank tensor decomposition can represent user-service-time QoS interactions
    The entire approach assumes the observed QoS tensor is approximately low-rank; this is the standard inductive bias for latent factor models and is not independently justified.
  • domain assumption The WS-DREAM dataset records realistic QoS values and zero entries can be excluded
    Section 4.1 states that zero entries are excluded from assessment, which may bias evaluation since zero values are valid QoS observations in some settings.
invented entities (1)
  • snowflake core tensor
    purpose: A structured core tensor in Eq. (2) intended to enhance interactions among user, service, and time latent factors.
    It is a new mathematical construction with no falsifiable handle beyond the reported test-set results; there is no external benchmark or theoretical property that independently validates the structure.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamic QoS Prediction via a Non-Negative Tensor Snowflake Factorization." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KNQZHS6V

@misc{pith2026250418588,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamic QoS Prediction via a Non-Negative Tensor Snowflake Factorization},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KNQZHS6V}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18588}
}
read the original abstract

Dynamic quality of service (QoS) data exhibit rich temporal patterns in user-service interactions, which are crucial for a comprehensive understanding of user behavior and service conditions in Web service. As the number of users and services increases, there is a large amount of unobserved QoS data, which significantly affects users'choice of services. To predict unobserved QoS data, we propose a Non-negative Snowflake Factorization of tensors model. This method designs a snowflake core tensor to enhance the model's learning capability. Additionally, it employs a single latent factor-based, nonnegative multiplication update on tensor (SLF-NMUT) for parameter learning. Empirical results demonstrate that the proposed model more accurately learns dynamic user-service interaction patterns, thereby yielding improved predictions for missing QoS data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.18588 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. QoS tensor of user–service–time showing the response time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The schematic design of NSFT model. This NSFT model leverages the snowflake core tensor to enhance the model’s learning capability. The schematic design of NSFT model is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. The MAE and RMSE of M1, M2, M3 and M4 on D1, D2, D3 and D4. In this experiment, all the results are summarized in Table Ⅲ and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [34]

    Biased multiobjective optimization and decomposition algorithm,

    H. Li, Q. Zhang, and J. Deng, “Biased multiobjective optimization and decomposition algorithm,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 52–66, 2016

    work page 2016

  2. [28]

    A PID -incorporated latent factorization of tensors approach to dynamically weighted directed network analysis,

    H. Wu, X. Luo, M. Zhou, M. J. Rawa, K. Sedraoui, and A. Albeshri, “A PID -incorporated latent factorization of tensors approach to dynamically weighted directed network analysis,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 533–546, 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [5]

    Outlier-resilient web service QoS prediction,

    F. Ye, Z. Lin, C. Chen, Z. Zheng, and H. Huang, “Outlier-resilient web service QoS prediction,” in Proceedings of The Web Conference, pp. 3099–3110, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [1]

    The NIST definition of cloud computing,

    M. Peter, T. Granc e, and others, “The NIST definition of cloud computing,” Computer Security Division, Information Technology Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2011

    work page 2011

  5. [2]

    N. B. Ruparelia, Cloud computing, Mit Press, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [3]

    DeepTSQP: Temporal-aware service QoS prediction via deep neural network and feature integration,

    G. Zou, T. Li, M. Jiang, S. Hu, C. Cao, B. Zhang, Y . Gan, and Y . Chen, “DeepTSQP: Temporal-aware service QoS prediction via deep neural network and feature integration,” Knowledge -Based Systems, vol. 241, p. 108062, 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [4]

    Temporal pattern-aware QoS prediction via biased non-negative latent factorization of tensors,

    X. Luo, H. Wu, H. Yuan, and M. Zhou, “Temporal pattern-aware QoS prediction via biased non-negative latent factorization of tensors,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 1798–1809, 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [6]

    NeuLFT: A novel approach to nonlinear canonical polyadic decomposition on high- dimensional incomplete tensors,

    X. Luo, H. Wu, and Z. Li, “NeuLFT: A novel approach to nonlinear canonical polyadic decomposition on high- dimensional incomplete tensors,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 6148–6166, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 60 references
  1. [7]

    Non-negative latent factorization of tensors model based on β-divergence for time-aware QoS prediction,

    Z. Peng and H. Wu, “Non-negative latent factorization of tensors model based on β-divergence for time-aware QoS prediction,” in Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control, pp. 1–6, 2022

    2022

  2. [8]

    Exploring latent features for memory -based QoS prediction in cloud computing,

    Y . Zhang, Z. Zheng, and M. R. Lyu, “Exploring latent features for memory -based QoS prediction in cloud computing,” in Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 30th International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, pp. 1–10, 2011

    2011

  3. [9]

    Collaborative web service QoS prediction with location -based regularization,

    W. Lo, J. Yin, S. Deng, Y . Li, and Z. Wu, “Collaborative web service QoS prediction with location -based regularization,” in Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 19th International Conference on Web Services, pp. 464–471, 2012

    2012

  4. [10]

    Collaborative web service QoS pre diction via neighborhood integrated matrix factorization,

    Z. Zheng, H. Ma, M. R. Lyu, and I. King, “Collaborative web service QoS pre diction via neighborhood integrated matrix factorization,” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 289–299, 2012

    2012

  5. [12]

    A posterior-neighborhood-regularized latent factor model for highly accurate web service QoS prediction,

    D. Wu, Q. He, X. Luo, M. Shang, Y . He, and G. Wang, “A posterior-neighborhood-regularized latent factor model for highly accurate web service QoS prediction,” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 793–805, 2019

    2019

  6. [13]

    Generating highly accurate predictions for missing QoS data via aggregating nonnegative latent factor models,

    X. Luo, M. C. Zhou, Y . Xia, Q. Zhu, A. C. Ammari, and A. Alabdulwahab, “Generating highly accurate predictions for missing QoS data via aggregating nonnegative latent factor models,” IEEE Transact ions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 524–537, 2015

    2015

  7. [15]

    An effective scheme for QoS estimation via alternating direction method-based matrix factorization,

    X. Luo, M. C. Zhou, Z. Wang, Y . Xia, and Q. Zhu, “An effective scheme for QoS estimation via alternating direction method-based matrix factorization,” IEEE Transactions on Ser vices Computing, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 503–518, 2016

    2016

  8. [16]

    On plasticity, invariance, and mutually frozen weights in sequential task learning,

    J. Zilly, A. Achille, A. Censi, and E. Frazzoli, “On plasticity, invariance, and mutually frozen weights in sequential task learning,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 34, pp. 12 386–12399, 2021

    2021

  9. [17]

    Splitting and alternating direction methods,

    G. I. Marchuk, “Splitting and alternating direction methods,” in Handbook of Numerical Analysis, vol. 1, pp. 197–462, 1990. Elsevier

    1990

  10. [18]

    Temporal pattern-aware QoS prediction by biased non-negative Tucker factorization of tensors,

    P. Tang, T. Ruan, H. Wu, and X. Luo, “Temporal pattern-aware QoS prediction by biased non-negative Tucker factorization of tensors,” Neurocomputing, vol. 582, p. 127447, 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Advancing non -negative latent factorization of tensors with diversified regularization schemes,

    H. Wu, X. Luo, and M. C. Zhou, “Advancing non -negative latent factorization of tensors with diversified regularization schemes,” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1334–1344, 2020

    2020

  12. [20]

    A novel tensor decomposition -based efficient detector for low - altitude aerial objects with knowledge distillation scheme,

    N. Zeng, X. Li, P. Wu, H. Li, and X. Luo, “A novel tensor decomposition -based efficient detector for low - altitude aerial objects with knowledge distillation scheme,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 487–501, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Robust low-rank latent feature analysis for spatiotemporal signal recovery,

    D. Wu, Z. Li, Z. Yu, Y . He, and X. Luo, “Robust low-rank latent feature analysis for spatiotemporal signal recovery,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    An α–β-divergence-generalized recommender for highly accurate predictions of missing user preferences,

    M. Shang, Y . Yuan, X. Luo, and M. Zhou, “An α–β-divergence-generalized recommender for highly accurate predictions of missing user preferences,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 52, no. 8, pp. 8006 –8018, 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    MMLF: Multi-metric latent feature analysis for high -dimensional and incomplete data,

    D. Wu, P. Zhang, Y . He, and X. Luo, “MMLF: Multi-metric latent feature analysis for high -dimensional and incomplete data,” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 575–588, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    An alternating-direction-method of multipliers-incorporated approach to symmetric non -negative latent fact or analysis,

    X. Luo, Y . Zhong, Z. Wang, and M. Li, “An alternating-direction-method of multipliers-incorporated approach to symmetric non -negative latent fact or analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 4826–4840, 2021

    2021

  17. [26]

    Generalized Nesterov's acceleration-incorporated, non-negative and adaptive latent factor analysis,

    X. Luo, Y . Zhou, Z. Liu, L. Hu, and M. Zhou, “Generalized Nesterov's acceleration-incorporated, non-negative and adaptive latent factor analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 2809–2823, 2021

    2021

  18. [27]

    A generalized Nesterov -accelerated second-order latent factor model for high - dimensional and incomplete data,

    W. Li, R. Wang, and X. Luo, “A generalized Nesterov -accelerated second-order latent factor model for high - dimensional and incomplete data,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2023

    2023

  19. [29]

    Temporal QoS-aware web service recommendation via non-negative tensor factorization,

    W. Zhang, H. Sun, X. Liu, and X. Guo, “Temporal QoS-aware web service recommendation via non-negative tensor factorization,” in Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 585 –596, 2014

    2014

  20. [30]

    Po sition-transitional particle swarm optimization - incorporated latent factor analysis,

    X. Luo, Y . Yuan, S. Chen, N. Zeng, and Z. Wang, “Po sition-transitional particle swarm optimization - incorporated latent factor analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 3958–3970, 2020

    2020

  21. [31]

    Two-stream graph convolutional network-incorporated latent feature analysis,

    F. Bi, T. He, Y . Xie, and X. Luo, “Two-stream graph convolutional network-incorporated latent feature analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 3027–3042, 2023

    2023

  22. [33]

    Shapira, L

    B. Shapira, L. Rokach, and F. Ricci, Recommender Systems Handbook. Berlin: Springer, 2022

    2022

  23. [35]

    Web service QoS prediction using improved software source code metrics,

    S. Rangarajan, H. Liu, and H. Wang, “Web service QoS prediction using improved software source code metrics,” PLoS ONE, vol. 15, no. 1, p. e0226867, 2020

    2020

  24. [37]

    Neural collaborative filtering,

    X. He, L. Liao, H. Zhang, L. Nie, X. Hu, and T.-S. Chua, “Neural collaborative filtering,” in Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 173–182, 2017

    2017

  25. [38]

    Neural tensor factorization for temporal interaction learning,

    X. Wu, B. Shi, Y . Dong, C. Huang, and N. V . Chawla, “Neural tensor factorization for temporal interaction learning,” in Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, pp. 537– 545, 2019

    2019

  26. [39]

    Stochastic gradient descent tricks,

    L. Bottou, “Stochastic gradient descent tricks,” in Neural Networks: Tricks of the Trade: Second Edition, pp. 421–436, Springer, 2012

    2012

  27. [40]

    Adaptively-accelerated parallel stochastic gradient descent for high-dimensional and incomplete data representation learning,

    W. Qin, X. Luo, and M. Zhou, “Adaptively-accelerated parallel stochastic gradient descent for high-dimensional and incomplete data representation learning,” IEEE Transactions on Big Data, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 92–107, 2023

    2023

  28. [41]

    Particle swarm optimization,

    J. Kennedy, a nd R. Eberhart, “Particle swarm optimization,” in Proceedings of the 1995 International Conference on Neural Networks, vol. 4, pp. 1942–1948, 1995

    1995

  29. [42]

    Pseudo gradient-adjusted particle swarm optimization for accurate adaptive latent factor analysis,

    X. Luo, J. Chen, Y . Yuan, and Z. Wang, “Pseudo gradient-adjusted particle swarm optimization for accurate adaptive latent factor analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 2213–2226, 2024

    2024

  30. [43]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,

    D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  31. [44]

    A Fine-Grained Regularization Scheme for Nonnegative Latent Factorization of High-Dimensional and Incomplete Tensors,

    H. Wu, Y . Qiao, and X. Luo, “A Fine-Grained Regularization Scheme for Nonnegative Latent Factorization of High-Dimensional and Incomplete Tensors,” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 2024

    2024

  32. [45]

    HP-CSF: An GPU Optimization Method for CP Decomposition of Incomplete Tensors,

    G. Liu and H. Wu, “HP-CSF: An GPU Optimization Method for CP Decomposition of Incomplete Tensors,” in Proceedings of the IFIP International Conference on Network and Parallel Computing, pp. 77–90, 2024

    2024

  33. [46]

    A Cauchy loss -incorporated nonnegative latent factorization of tensors model for spatiotemporal traffic data recovery,

    H. Wu and J. Mi, “A Cauchy loss -incorporated nonnegative latent factorization of tensors model for spatiotemporal traffic data recovery,” Neurocomputing, p. 129575, 2025

    2025

  34. [47]

    A novel approach to large -scale dynamically weighted directed network representation,

    X. Luo, H. Wu, Z. Wang, J. Wang, and D. Meng, “A novel approach to large -scale dynamically weighted directed network representation,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 44, no. 12, pp. 9756–9773, 2021

    2021

  35. [48]

    A PID -incorporated latent factorization of tensors approach to dynamically weighte d directed network analysis,

    H. Wu, X. Luo, M. Zhou, M. J. Rawa, K. Sedraoui, and A. Albeshri, “A PID -incorporated latent factorization of tensors approach to dynamically weighte d directed network analysis,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 533–546, 2021

    2021

  36. [49]

    NeuLFT: A novel approach to nonlinear canonical polyadic decomposition on high-dimensional incomplete tensors,

    X. Luo, H. Wu, and Z. Li, “NeuLFT: A novel approach to nonlinear canonical polyadic decomposition on high-dimensional incomplete tensors,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 6148–6166, 2022

    2022

  37. [50]

    Instance-frequency-weighted regularized, nonnegative and adaptive latent factorization of tensors for dynamic QoS analysis,

    H. Wu and X. Luo, “Instance-frequency-weighted regularized, nonnegative and adaptive latent factorization of tensors for dynamic QoS analysis,” in Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Web Services, pp. 560–568, 2021

    2021

  38. [51]

    Data driven vibration control: A review,

    W. Yang, S. Li, and X. Luo, “Data driven vibration control: A review,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 1898–1917, 2024

    1917

  39. [52]

    Neural latent factorization of tensors for dynamically weighted directed networks analysis,

    H. Wu, X. Luo, and M. Zhou, “Neural latent factorization of tensors for dynamically weighted directed networks analysis,” in Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 3061–3066, 2021

    2021

  40. [53]

    A distributed adaptive second -order latent factor analysis model,

    J. Wang, W. Li, and X. Luo, “A distributed adaptive second -order latent factor analysis model,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 2024

    2024

  41. [54]

    Discovering hidden pattern in large -scale dynamically weighted directed network via latent factorization of tensors,

    H. Wu, X. Luo, and M. Zhou, “Discovering hidden pattern in large -scale dynamically weighted directed network via latent factorization of tensors,” in Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 17th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering, pp. 1533–1538, 2021

    2021

  42. [55]

    Efficient representation to dynamic QoS data via momentum -incorporated biased nonnegative and adaptive latent factorization of tensors,

    M. C hen and H. Wu, “Efficient representation to dynamic QoS data via momentum -incorporated biased nonnegative and adaptive latent factorization of tensors,” in Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Cyber Physical Social Intelligence, pp. 1–6, 2021

    2021

  43. [56]

    Proportional-integral-derivative-incorporated latent factorization of tensors for large-scale dynamic network analysis,

    H. Wu, Y . Xia, and X. Luo, “Proportional-integral-derivative-incorporated latent factorization of tensors for large-scale dynamic network analysis,” in Proceedings of the 2021 China Automation Congress, pp. 2980–2984, 2021

    2021

  44. [57]

    Adjusting learning depth in nonnegative latent factorization of tensors for accurately modeling temporal patterns in dynamic QoS data,

    X. Luo, M. Chen, H. Wu, Z. Liu, H. Yuan, and M. Zhou, “Adjusting learning depth in nonnegative latent factorization of tensors for accurately modeling temporal patterns in dynamic QoS data,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 2142–2155, 2021

    2021

  45. [58]

    A Fast and Inherently Nonnegative Latent Factorization of Tensors Model for Dynamic Directed Network Representation,

    A. Zeng and H. Wu, “A Fast and Inherently Nonnegative Latent Factorization of Tensors Model for Dynamic Directed Network Representation,” in Proceedings of the 2024 27th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, pp. 2955–2960, 2024

    2024

  46. [59]

    Dynamically weighted directed network link prediction using tensor ring decomposition,

    Q. Wang and H. Wu, “Dynamically weighted directed network link prediction using tensor ring decomposition,” in Proceedings of the 2024 27th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, pp. 2864–2869, 2024

    2024

  47. [60]

    Modularity Maximization-Incorporated Nonnegative Tensor RESCAL Decomposition for Dynamic Community Detection,

    H. Fang, Q. Wang, Q. Hu, and H. Wu, “Modularity Maximization-Incorporated Nonnegative Tensor RESCAL Decomposition for Dynamic Community Detection,” in Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pp. 1871–1876, 2024

    2024

  48. [61]

    Sdgnn: Symmetry-preserving dual-stream graph neural networks,

    J. Chen, Y . Yuan, and X. Luo, “Sdgnn: Symmetry-preserving dual-stream graph neural networks,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 1717–1719, 2024

    2024

  49. [62]

    Kinematics-based motion-force control for redundant manipulators with quaternion control,

    Z. Xie, L. Jin, and X. Luo, “Kinematics-based motion-force control for redundant manipulators with quaternion control,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1815–1828, 2022

    2022

  50. [63]

    MNL: A highly -efficient model for large -scale dynamic weighted directed network representation,

    M. Chen, C. He, and X. Luo, “MNL: A highly -efficient model for large -scale dynamic weighted directed network representation,” IEEE Transactions on Big Data, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 889–903, 2022

    2022

  51. [64]

    Cryptocurrency transaction network embedding from static and dynamic perspectives: An overview,

    Y . Zhou, X. Luo, and M. Zhou, “Cryptocurrency transaction network embedding from static and dynamic perspectives: An overview,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 1105–1121, 2023

    2023

  52. [65]

    An adaptive divergence-based non-negative latent factor model,

    Y . Yuan, R. Wang, G. Yuan, and X. Luo, “An adaptive divergence-based non-negative latent factor model,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, vol. 53, no. 10, pp. 6475–6487, 2023

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.