Argumentation-based recommendations: Fantastic explanations and how to find them

76Citations
Citations of this article
50Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

A significant problem of recommender systems is their inability to explain recommendations, resulting in turn in ineffective feedback from users and the inability to adapt to users' preferences. We propose a hybrid method for calculating predicted ratings, built upon an item/aspect-based graph with users' partially given ratings, that can be naturally used to provide explanations for recommendations, extracted from user-tailored Tripolar Argumentation Frameworks (TFs). We show that our method can be understood as a gradual semantics for TFs, exhibiting a desirable, albeit weak, property of balance. We also show experimentally that our method is competitive in generating correct predictions, compared with state-of-the-art methods, and illustrate how users can interact with the generated explanations to improve quality of recommendations.

References Powered by Scopus

Matrix factorization techniques for recommender systems

9137Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

An introduction to kernel and nearest-neighbor nonparametric regression

4493Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games

3847Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Co-attentive multi-task learning for explainable recommendation

131Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Argumentation and explainable artificial intelligence: A survey

125Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Argumentative XAI: A Survey

104Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rago, A., Cocarascu, O., & Toni, F. (2018). Argumentation-based recommendations: Fantastic explanations and how to find them. In IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 2018-July, pp. 1949–1955). International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2018/269

Readers over time

‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘2506121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 24

69%

Researcher 6

17%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

9%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

6%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Computer Science 26

76%

Engineering 5

15%

Social Sciences 2

6%

Design 1

3%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0