The paper documents the migration of a live conversational recommendation system from a gradient‑boosted multiclass model to a pairwise‑binary deep recommender. It explains how reformulating the task, using negative sampling, noise injection, and attention pooling over transcript chunks enabled the new model to handle dynamic, multimodal data and long conversation context. The authors compare several architectures and loss functions, showing that the deep recommender matches or surpasses the CatBoost baseline, especially in later conversational stages.
By Sonia Sharma, Jeyendran Balakrishnan, Shreya Rajpal, Swapnil Parekh, Nagaraj Janardhana, Andrew Mattarella-Micke
arXiv:2604. 20861v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Semantic IDs (SIDs) provide the discrete item vocabulary used by generative recommendation, but their quality depends on what item evidence is preserved before quantization.
By Yangchen Zeng, Jinze Wang
arXiv:2606. 17276v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative recommendation (GR) has emerged as a promising direction for recommender systems.
By Sunwoo Kim, Sunkyung Lee, Clark Mingxuan Ju, Donald Loveland, Bhuvesh Kumar, Kijung Shin, Neil Shah, Liam Collins
The paper introduces PROVE-REC, a two‑pass framework that generates verifiable preference proofs for large language model (LLM) recommendation systems. In Pass A, the model condenses user interaction histories into a compact proof of positive and avoidance claims linked to specific evidence entries. Pass B then uses only this proof and its evidence to predict the next item, ensuring the recommendation follows the reasoning path. Verification steps compare masked evidence and removed claims to confirm grounding and influence, while a ranking‑preservation objective retains useful historical information. Experiments on diverse real‑world datasets show PROVE‑REC outperforms strong baselines by up to 7.45%, producing claims that are both better grounded and more influential to recommendation quality.
By Yu Hou, Nathaniel Kang, Pengkai Wang, Hua Li
LLMAR is a tuning‑free recommendation framework designed for sparse, text‑rich industrial B2B domains. It transforms user behavioral history into structured semantic motives using LLM inference, employs a reflection loop to self‑correct hallucinations, and operates cost‑effectively with asynchronous batch processing. Experiments on MovieLens‑1M, Amazon Prime Pantry, and a construction risk dataset show LLMAR surpasses state‑of‑the‑art learning models, achieving up to a 54.6% nDCG@10 improvement while keeping inference costs around $1 per 1,000 users.
By Ryogo Hishikawa, Ichiro Kataoka, Shinya Yuda
The paper introduces SARA, an industrial framework that scales articulated user rationales (AURs) for recommendation systems. It curates a high‑quality AUR dataset from 240 M users, trains a 7B‑parameter MLLM (SARA‑7B) to generate rationales for millions of authors, and integrates these generated rationales into a production ranking model (SARA‑Ranker). Offline and online experiments demonstrate that the system produces more specific, polarity‑consistent rationales and improves user engagement while reducing negative feedback.
By Haoke Xiao, Yueyang Liu, Yuhui Zhang, Xiang Chen, Yufei Liu, Jia Xu, Yalong Guan, Xiaolan Zhu, Xiaoyu Zhang, Shijun Wang, Shuang Yang, Zijie Meng, Zejian Zhang, Ruochen Yang, Xiangyu Wu, Tingting Gao, Han Li, Lantao Hu, Cheng Luo, Kun Gai
arXiv:2606. 11023v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sequential recommendation aims to predict users' next interaction with items by analyzing their historical behavior.
By Yifan Li, Jiahong Liu, Xinni Zhang, Hao Chen, Yankai Chen, Wenhao Yu, Jianting Chen, Irwin King
Sequential recommendation aims to predict users' next interaction with items by analyzing their historical behavior. However, the limited quality of item representations remains a critical bottleneck.
arXiv:2606. 18897v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Intent-based recommender systems have gained significant attention for improving accuracy and interpretability by modeling the underlying motivations behind user behaviors.
By Jiangnan Xia, Xuansheng Wu, Yu Yang, Xin Wang, Ninghao Liu
The paper investigates how the choice of random training seed affects recommender‑system experiments. By fixing the data split and varying seeds across hyperparameter settings, the authors analyze seed effects on user‑level metrics, validation‑based model selection, and recommendation‑list agreement. Their findings show that seed variation can be detectable and its impact depends on configuration separation, validation‑to‑test transfer, and top‑k list similarity, indicating that single‑seed results may overstate evaluation stability.
By Juan Manuel Rodriguez, Oleg Lesota, Antonela Tommasel
arXiv:2608.30333v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Next-basket repurchase recommendation is commonly formulated as a ranking task: given a customer's purchase history, the system ranks previously purc...
By Yanan Cao, Anay Dombe, Murali Mohana Krishna Dandu, Shreeranjani Srirangamsridharan, Sinduja Subramaniam, Yogananth Mahalingam, Evren Korpeoglu, Kannan Achan
arXiv:2608. 11493v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Traditional offline recommendation evaluation relies heavily on complex, manually maintained feature pipelines that are difficult to scale.
By Alireza S. Ziabari, Kat Ellis, Colleen Chan, Ding Tong