Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Personalized Transformer for Explainable Recommendation

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2105.11601 v2 pith:KLPFLNYM submitted 2021-05-25 cs.IR cs.AIcs.CLcs.LG

classification cs.IRcs.AIcs.CLcs.LG
keywords personalizedtransformerexplainablerecommendationdesigngenerationitemlanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Personalization of natural language generation plays a vital role in a large spectrum of tasks, such as explainable recommendation, review summarization and dialog systems. In these tasks, user and item IDs are important identifiers for personalization. Transformer, which is demonstrated with strong language modeling capability, however, is not personalized and fails to make use of the user and item IDs since the ID tokens are not even in the same semantic space as the words. To address this problem, we present a PErsonalized Transformer for Explainable Recommendation (PETER), on which we design a simple and effective learning objective that utilizes the IDs to predict the words in the target explanation, so as to endow the IDs with linguistic meanings and to achieve personalized Transformer. Besides generating explanations, PETER can also make recommendations, which makes it a unified model for the whole recommendation-explanation pipeline. Extensive experiments show that our small unpretrained model outperforms fine-tuned BERT on the generation task, in terms of both effectiveness and efficiency, which highlights the importance and the nice utility of our design.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. How Reliable are LLMs for Reasoning on the Re-ranking task?

    cs.CL 2025-08 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    In a small Earth-science reranking dataset, DPO-trained LLMs rank best and SHAP attribution scores help a general LLM explain why items were selected, but the explanation claim rests on only two examples.

Pith tools