Scouts, Promoters, and Connectors: The Roles of Ratings in Nearest-Neighbor Collaborative Filtering

Recommender systems aggregate individual user ratings into predictions of products or services that might interest visitors. The quality of this aggregation process crucially affects the user experience and hence the effectiveness of recommenders in e-commerce. We present a characterization of nearest-neighbor collaborative filtering that allows us to disaggregate global recommender performance measures into contributions made by each individual rating. In particular, we formulate three roles-scouts, promoters, and connectors-that capture how users receive recommendations, how items get recommended, and how ratings of these two types are themselves connected, respectively. These roles find direct uses in improving recommendations for users, in better targeting of items and, most importantly, in helping monitor the health of the system as a whole. For instance, they can be used to track the evolution of neighborhoods, to identify rating subspaces that do not contribute ( or contribute negatively) to system performance, to enumerate users who are in danger of leaving, and to assess the susceptibility of the system to attacks such as shilling. We argue that the three rating roles presented here provide broad primitives to manage a recommender system and its community.

A playful side to twelfth-century mathematics

As editors of the book Lilavati's Daughters: The Women Scientists of India, reviewed by Asha Gopinathan (Nature 460, 1082; 2009), we would like to elaborate on the background to its title. Lilavati was a mathematical treatise of the twelfth century, composed by the mathematician and astronomer Bhaskaracharya (1114–85) — also known as Bhaskara II — who was a teacher of repute and author of several other texts. The name Lilavati, which literally means 'playful', is a surprising title for an early scientific book. Some of the mathematical problems posed in the book are in verse form, and are addressed to a girl, the eponymous Lilavati. However, there is little real evidence concerning Lilavati's historicity. Tradition holds that she was Bhaskaracharya's daughter and that he wrote the treatise to console her after an accident that left her unable to marry. But this could be a later interpolation, as the idea was first mentioned in a Persian commentary. An alternative view has it that Lilavati was married at an inauspicious time and was widowed shortly afterwards. Other sources have implied that Lilavati was Bhaskaracharya's wife, or even one of his students — raising the possibility that women in parts of the Indian subcontinent could have participated in higher education as early as eight centuries ago. However, given that Bhaskara was a poet and pedagogue, it is also possible that he chose to address his mathematical problems to a doe-eyed girl simply as a whimsical and charming literary device.