L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Développement · SKILL.md

algo-rec-mf

algo-rec-mf

Implement matrix factorization to decompose user-item interaction matrices into latent factor representations. Use this skill when the user needs scalable collaborative filtering, latent feature discovery, or dimensionality reduction for recommendation — even if they say 'SVD recommendations', 'latent factors', or 'factorize the rating matrix'.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: "algo-rec-mf" description: "Implement matrix factorization to decompose user-item interaction matrices into latent factor representations. Use this skill when the user needs scalable collaborative filtering, latent feature discovery, or dimensionality reduction for recommendation — even if they say 'SVD recommendations', 'latent factors', or 'factorize the rating matrix'." metadata: category: "WP-36 推薦系統" tags: ["recommendation", "matrix-factorization", "svd", "latent-factors"]

Matrix Factorization

Overview

Matrix factorization decomposes the user-item interaction matrix R (m×n) into two low-rank matrices: U (m×k) and V (n×k), where k << min(m,n). Predicted rating: r̂ᵢⱼ = uᵢ · vⱼ. Trains in O(k × nnz × iterations) where nnz = non-zero entries.

When to Use

Trigger conditions:

  • Scaling CF beyond pairwise similarity (millions of users/items)
  • Discovering latent factors that explain user-item interactions
  • Predicting ratings for unobserved user-item pairs

When NOT to use:

  • When interaction data is extremely sparse (< 0.1% fill) — insufficient for learning
  • When you need real-time updates (retraining is expensive)

Algorithm

IRON LAW: Rank k Controls Bias-Variance Trade-Off
- Too LOW k: underfits, misses nuanced preferences (high bias)
- Too HIGH k: overfits to noise, poor generalization (high variance)
- Typical k: 20-200. Select via cross-validation on held-out ratings.
- Always add regularization (λ) to prevent overfitting.

Phase 1: Input Validation

Load sparse interaction matrix. Split into train/validation/test. Check minimum density. Gate: Train matrix has sufficient entries per user and item.

Phase 2: Core Algorithm

ALS (Alternating Least Squares):

  1. Initialize U, V randomly (or with SVD warm-start)
  2. Fix V, solve for U: minimize ||R - UV^T||² + λ(||U||² + ||V||²)
  3. Fix U, solve for V using same objective
  4. Alternate until convergence (RMSE change < ε)

SGD alternative: Update u_i, v_j incrementally for each observed rating using gradient descent.

Phase 3: Verification

Compute RMSE on held-out validation set. Compare against baseline (global mean, user mean). Gate: Validation RMSE significantly below baseline.

Phase 4: Output

Return top-N predictions per user with predicted scores.

Output Format

{
  "recommendations": [{"user_id": "u1", "items": [{"item_id": "i5", "predicted_rating": 4.3}]}],
  "metadata": {"rank_k": 50, "regularization": 0.01, "iterations": 20, "train_rmse": 0.82, "val_rmse": 0.91}
}

Examples

Sample I/O

Input: 3×3 rating matrix R (0 = unobserved), k=1

R = [[5, 3, 0],
     [4, 0, 2],
     [0, 1, 1]]

Expected: After ALS with k=1 (one latent factor, λ=0.01, 50 iterations), approximate factorization:

U ≈ [[2.24], [1.84], [0.53]]
V ≈ [[2.23], [1.06], [0.98]]
R_hat ≈ [[4.99, 2.37, 2.20],
         [4.10, 1.95, 1.80],
         [1.18, 0.56, 0.52]]

Verify: R_hat ≈ R on observed entries (within 0.2 RMSE). U[0] >> U[2] correctly captures user 0's higher ratings.

Edge Cases

InputExpectedWhy
User with 1 ratingPoor predictions for that userInsufficient data to learn user factors
Highly popular itemPredicted near averageDominant first latent factor captures popularity
All ratings = 5Trivial factorizationNo variance to learn from

Gotchas

  • Implicit data needs different loss: For clicks/views (no explicit ratings), use weighted matrix factorization (Hu et al. 2008) with confidence weighting, not RMSE.
  • Cold start remains: New users/items have no entries in R. MF can't factorize what doesn't exist. Use side features or hybrid approaches.
  • Negative sampling: For implicit feedback, you must sample negative examples (unobserved ≠ disliked). Random negative sampling works but biased sampling is better.
  • Initialization matters: Random initialization can converge to poor local optima. SVD-based warm-start often helps.
  • Bias terms: Add user bias bᵢ and item bias bⱼ: r̂ᵢⱼ = μ + bᵢ + bⱼ + uᵢ·vⱼ. This captures systematic rating tendencies.

References

  • For ALS vs SGD comparison, see references/optimization-comparison.md
  • For implicit feedback matrix factorization, see references/implicit-mf.md
Skills enregistrées