| Literature DB >> 35983159 |
Abstract
The film industry has also caught the fast train of Internet development. Various movie resources have come into view. Users need to spend a lot of time searching for movies they are interested in. This method wastes time and is very bad. The article proposes an NMF personalized movie recommendation algorithm, which can recommend movies to users based on their historical behavior and preference. The research results of the article show the following: (1) the experiment counts movie reviews of different users in the same time span. The results show that 48.42% of users have only commented on a movie once, 79.76% of users have posted less than or equal to 5 comments, and 89.92% of user reviews have posted less than or equal to 10 times. (2) In the comparative experiments of the NMF algorithm in different dimensions, the effect of the NMF-E algorithm is much better than that of the NMF-A algorithm. The accuracy, recall, and F1 value of the NME-E algorithm are all 3 types. The experimental results show that the NME-E algorithm is the best among all algorithms. (3) In the experiment to test the effectiveness of the NMF personalized recommendation algorithm, comparing the experimental results, the MAE value of the improved NMF personalized recommendation algorithm is lower than that of the unimproved algorithm. When the number of neighbors is 10, the highest value of the improved MAE of the previous algorithm is 0.837. After the improved algorithm, the MAE value is the highest (0.83), and the MAE value has dropped by 0.007, indicating that the error is smaller after the improved algorithm, and the result of recommending movies is more accurate. The recall value of the four algorithms will increase as the number of neighbors increases. Among them, the recall value of the NMF algorithm proposed in the article is the highest among several algorithms. The highest value can reach 0.200, which is higher than the highest value of other algorithms. It shows that the recommendation effect of NMF algorithm is the best. (4) According to the results of the questionnaire, after using the NMF personalized recommendation algorithm, users' satisfaction increased from 20% to 50%, an increase of 30%, and their dissatisfaction decreased from 15% to 8%, a decrease of 7%. Relative satisfaction increased from 52% to 55%, an increase of 3%, satisfaction increased from 35% to 60%, an increase of 25%, and dissatisfaction decreased from 40% to 20%, a decrease of 20%, indicating that the algorithm can meet the requirements of most people.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35983159 PMCID: PMC9381235 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2970514
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
User evaluation form.
| User ID | Time | Comment | score |
|
| |||
| 68547261 (A) | 2018-02-23 17:47:06 | Watching “Interstellar,” the initial surprise comes from music. The first climax of the film is the appearance of the song called comfield chase. Perhaps the reason why this song became the core of the film is this kind of senseless spirit of exploration. Director Nolan said after listening to this piece: My movie is ready for shooting. Hans Zimmer's soundtrack makes this film the uncrowned king in many people's hearts. | 4 |
|
| |||
| 58691048 (B) | 2019-02-12 23:55:04 | Why can this science fiction movie stand out and be included in the history of film and television? Interstellar is a real hard science fiction movie. The movie incorporates the concept of five-dimensional space. This is a film that fully uses the concept of time and space. Its script is more based on data theories and formulas to support the development of the entire plot. Compared with other movies with no scientific basis, it is judged high. | 5 |
|
| |||
| 78651562 (C) | 2018-10-25 9:53:09 | “Interstellar,” Nolan is another magical film, and it should be the greatest science fiction film. Leaving aside the science fiction elements in the movie, after all, I do not understand [covering face]. From a human point of view, Nolan always likes to put the complexity of human nature in front of people, facing the instinct to survive, calling him the Earth. The hopeful professor Mann has become another Harvey Dante, with a feeling of DK series. | 5 |
|
| |||
| 78961310 (D) | 2014-11-16 00:49:28 | Anne Hathaway said, I love him, but that does not mean I'm wrong. Love is something that humans cannot understand. It may be given to us by more advanced creatures. Although we think it is sensibility, it may be the highest level of wisdom. Anne Hathaway's short hair is very beautiful, like a smart and stubborn little boy, with human wisdom and love, who would not love her? | 4 |
Figure 1Flowchart of personalized recommendation.
Figure 2Overview of user recommendation algorithm.
User rating matrix.
| User | Movie A | Movie B | Movie C | Movie D | Movie E |
|
| |||||
| A | 3 | 4 | 0 | 3.5 | 0 |
| B | 4 | 0 | 4.5 | 0 | 3.5 |
| C | 0 | 3.5 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| D | 0 | 4 | 0 | 3.5 | 3 |
Common mixed recommendation models.
| Mixed way | Description |
|
| |
| Weighted | The calculation results of multiple recommendation techniques are weighted and mixed to generate recommendations |
|
| |
| Switching | The calculation results of multiple recommendation techniques are weighted and mixed to generate recommendations |
|
| |
| Cascade | The cascading technology constructs the order of preference between different projects in the iterative refinement process |
|
| |
| Combined | At the same time, multiple recommendation techniques are used to give multiple recommendation results to provide users with reference |
|
| |
| Feature combination | The features generated by a specific recommendation technique are input to another recommendation technique |
|
| |
| Increasing features | The output of the former recommended method is used as the input of the latter recommended method |
|
| |
| Meta-level mixing | An internal model generated by one recommendation technique is used as an input for another recommendation technique |
User rating matrix.
| User | Young you | Wolf warriors 2 | Me and my motherland |
|
| |||
| User F | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| User G | — | 3 | 6 |
User-movie collection rating matrix.
| User-movie collection |
|
| ⋯ |
| ⋯ |
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
| ⋯ |
| ⋯ |
|
|
|
|
| ⋯ |
| ⋯ |
|
| ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ | ⋯ |
|
|
|
| ⋯ |
| ⋯ |
|
Weights of topic vectors.
| High score | Low score | |
|
| ||
| Forward document weight |
|
|
| Negative document weight |
|
|
Evaluation record template.
| User ID | Time | Movie IDmmc1 | Score | Comment |
|
| ||||
| 61719620 | 2016-01-14 | 10577869 | 5 | Love movie I really like! we met in the dark, of course we love each other, family feelings, family trivial matters, everything is so beautiful... Remember the English accent? The hostess is so beautiful! male starring in sunglasses, handsome! It's worth watching again anyway |
Statistics of user evaluation times.
| Number of comments | User number | Percentage (%) |
|
| ||
| 1 | 237209 | 48.42 |
| ≤5 | 390775 | 79.76 |
| ≤10 | 440539 | 89.92 |
Evaluation criteria table.
| Metrics | Formula | |
|
| ||
| Accuracy | The accuracy measurement standard refers to the ratio of the number of hit movies to the number of recommended movies. The larger the index value, the more accurate the recommendation result. | Precision=hits |
|
| ||
| Recall rate | The recall rate standard refers to the ratio of the number of hit movies to the theoretical maximum number of hits. The larger the index value, the more accurate the recommendation result. | Recall=hits |
|
| ||
|
| The |
|
Figure 3Accuracy curve.
Figure 4Recall rate curve.
Figure 5F1 measurement value curve.
Figure 6Relationship between decomposition dimension and MAE value.
Figure 7Improved algorithm performance comparison chart.
MAE values of different algorithms.
| Algorithm | 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 | 35 | 40 | 45 | 50 |
|
| ||||||||||
| NMF personalized recommendation algorithm | 0.762 | 0.783 | 0.770 | 0.771 | 0.772 | 0.774 | 0.775 | 0.775 | 0.776 | 0.776 |
| Jaccard personalized recommendation algorithm | 0.815 | 0.790 | 0.790 | 0.791 | 0.795 | 0.797 | 0.802 | 0.803 | 0.804 | 0.809 |
| CEHPI personalized recommendation algorithm | 0.837 | 0.820 | 0.819 | 0.816 | 0.810 | 0.806 | 0.800 | 0.799 | 0.796 | 0.795 |
| NCF personalized recommendation algorithm | 0.810 | 0.791 | 0.790 | 0.790 | 0.785 | 0.784 | 0.783 | 0.782 | 0.780 | 0.779 |
Recall values of different algorithms.
| Algorithm | 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 | 35 | 40 | 45 | 50 |
|
| ||||||||||
| NMF personalized recommendation algorithm | 0.042 | 0.058 | 0.100 | 0.130 | 0.157 | 0.184 | 0.185 | 0.188 | 0.776 | 0.200 |
| Jaccard personalized recommendation algorithm | 0.024 | 0.030 | 0.042 | 0.051 | 0.063 | 0.080 | 0.090 | 0.095 | 0.804 | 0.100 |
| CEHPI personalized recommendation algorithm | 0.024 | 0.031 | 0.051 | 0.060 | 0.073 | 0.110 | 0.115 | 0.117 | 0.796 | 0.120 |
| NCF personalized recommendation algorithm | 0.030 | 0.050 | 0.073 | 0.091 | 0.120 | 0.160 | 0.172 | 0.176 | 0.780 | 0.190 |
Figure 8MAE values of different algorithms.
Figure 9Recall values of algorithms.
Figure 10User satisfaction survey.