query based music recommendations via preference embedding
play

Query-based Music Recommendations via Preference Embedding - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 10, 2023 •4.02k likes •4.36k views

Query-based Music Recommendations via Preference Embedding Chih-Ming Chen, Ming-Feng Tsai, Yu-Ching Lin, Yi-Hsuan Yang. Institutes involved in this research work CLIP Lab, National Chengchi University MAC Lab,

  1. Query-based Music Recommendations via Preference Embedding Chih-­‑Ming ¡Chen, ¡Ming-­‑Feng ¡Tsai, ¡Yu-­‑Ching ¡Lin, ¡Yi-­‑Hsuan ¡Yang.

  2. Institutes involved in this research work CLIP Lab, National Chengchi University MAC Lab, CITI, Academia Sinica Machine Learning Team, KKBOX

  3. Query-based Music Recommendations

  4. Query-based Music Recommendations

  5. Query-based Music Recommendations

  6. Query-based Music Recommendations

  7. Query-based Music Recommendations

  8. Query-based Music Recommendations

  9. The Graph Embedding Models Vertices Relation Graph Latent Space

  10. The Graph Embedding Models How to build 
 How to learn 
 Vertices the Relation Graph? the representations?

  11. Construction of User Preference Network 112 16 8 - - - T1 User - 2 119 64 - - U1 T2 - - 32 - 109 5 Track - - - - 12 8 U2 T3 # of Listening / Rating / 
 Album Like / Dislike / … U3 T4 Artist T5 U4 T6

  12. Construction of User Preference Network 112 16 8 - - - T1 User - 2 119 64 - - U1 T2 - - 32 - 109 5 Track - - - - 12 8 U2 T3 Al1 Album U3 T4 Al2 112 24 - - - 121 64 - Artist T5 Al3 - 32 - 114 U4 - - - 20 Al4 T6

  13. Construction of User Preference Network Ar1 112 16 8 - - - T1 User Ar2 - 2 119 64 - - U1 T2 - - 32 - 109 5 Track Ar3 - - - - 12 8 U2 T3 Al1 Album U3 T4 Al2 112 24 - - 112 24 - - 121 64 - 121 64 - Artist T5 Al3 - 32 - 114 - 32 114 U4 - - - 20 - - 20 Al4 T6

  14. User Preference Network Edges: User Preference Ar1 T1 binary value / numerical value Ar2 U1 Bipartite Graph T2 Ar3 it’s similar to CF-based models U2 T3 Heterogeneous Graph Al1 T4 U3 it considers multiple entities Al2 T5 Al3 U4 T6 Al4

  15. User Preference Network Edges: User Preference Ar1 T1 binary value / numerical value Ar2 U1 Bipartite Graph T2 Ar3 it’s similar to CF-based models U2 T3 Heterogeneous Graph Al1 T4 U3 it considers multiple entities Al2 This is how we achieve the 
 Query-based recommendations T5 Al3 U4 T6 Al4

  16. Heterogeneous Preference Embedding (HPE) Pr( community( ) | ) Φ ( ) Ar1 U3 U3 T1 Ar2 U1 compress the info T2 Ar3 U2 T3 Al1 T4 U3 Al2 T5 Al3 U4 T6 Al4

  17. Heterogeneous Preference Embedding (HPE) Pr( community( ) | ) Φ ( ) Ar1 U3 U3 T1 Ar2 U1 Sample an Edge T2 Ar3 Pr( | ) U2 T3 U3 T3 Al1 T4 U3 Al2 T5 Al3 U4 T6 Al4

  18. Heterogeneous Preference Embedding (HPE) Pr( community( ) | ) Φ ( ) Ar1 U3 U3 T1 Ar2 U1 Sample an Edge Random Walk T2 Ar3 Pr( | ) Pr( | ) U2 T3 U3 U1 U3 T3 Al1 T4 Pr( | ) U3 Al2 Al1 U3 T5 Al3 U4 T6 Al4

  19. Heterogeneous Preference Embedding (HPE) Pr( community( ) | ) Φ ( ) Ar1 U3 U3 T1 Ar2 U1 Sample an Edge Random Walk T2 Ar3 Pr( | ) Pr( | ) U2 T3 U3 U1 U3 T3 Al1 T4 Pr( | ) U3 Al2 Al1 U3 T5 X X k Φ ( v i ) k 2 O = � w i,j log p ( v j | Φ ( v i )) + λ Al3 U4 i ( i,j ) 2 S + negative sampling T6 Al4

  20. Heterogeneous Preference Embedding (HPE) Pr( community( ) | ) Φ ( ) Ar1 U3 U3 T1 Ar2 U1 Sample an Edge Random Walk T2 Ar3 Pr( | ) Pr( | ) U2 T3 U3 U1 U3 T3 Al1 T4 Pr( | ) U3 Al2 Al1 U3 T5 X X k Φ ( v i ) k 2 O = � w i,j log p ( v j | Φ ( v i )) + λ Al3 U4 i ( i,j ) 2 S + negative sampling T6 Al4

  21. Performance of Preference Embedding HitRatio@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 2.66% 2.66% 2.66% 4.32% 4.32% 4.32% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% MF 3.02% 3.93% 4.22% 7.11% 8.49% 8.93% 1.37% 1.79% 2.00% DeepWalk 3.18% 3.55% 3.54% 11.61% 12.55% 13.08% 1.71% 1.95% 1.95% LINE-2nd 3.44% 3.74% 4.10% 12.79% 13.47% 12.77% 1.62% 1.60% 1.14% Proposed PE 3.54 % * 4.22 % 4.51 % 12.95 % * 13.74 % * 14.20 % * 2.08 % * 2.15 % * 2.19 % mAP@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 3.27 % 3.27 % 3.27 % 5.03% 5.03% 5.03% 1.04% 1.04% 1.04% MF 1.87% 2.34% 2.60% 4.65% 5.85% 6.16% 1.88% 2.44% 2.81% DeepWalk 1.82% 2.10% 1.99% 8.73% 9.47% 10.01% 2.66% 2.70% 2.55% LINE-2nd 2.00% 2.10% 2.38% 9.95% 10.64% 10.09% 1.84% 1.60% 1.44% Proposed PE 2.08% 2.55% 2.71% 10.14 % 10.86 % * 11.31 % 2.86 % * 3.09 % * 3.12 %

  22. Performance of Preference Embedding HitRatio@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 2.66% 2.66% 2.66% 4.32% 4.32% 4.32% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% MF 3.02% 3.93% 4.22% 7.11% 8.49% 8.93% 1.37% 1.79% 2.00% DeepWalk 3.18% 3.55% 3.54% 11.61% 12.55% 13.08% 1.71% 1.95% 1.95% LINE-2nd 3.44% 3.74% 4.10% 12.79% 13.47% 12.77% 1.62% 1.60% 1.14% Proposed PE 3.54 % * 4.22 % 4.51 % 12.95 % * 13.74 % * 14.20 % * 2.08 % * 2.15 % * 2.19 % mAP@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 3.27 % 3.27 % 3.27 % 5.03% 5.03% 5.03% 1.04% 1.04% 1.04% MF 1.87% 2.34% 2.60% 4.65% 5.85% 6.16% 1.88% 2.44% 2.81% DeepWalk 1.82% 2.10% 1.99% 8.73% 9.47% 10.01% 2.66% 2.70% 2.55% LINE-2nd 2.00% 2.10% 2.38% 9.95% 10.64% 10.09% 1.84% 1.60% 1.44% Proposed PE 2.08% 2.55% 2.71% 10.14 % 10.86 % * 11.31 % 2.86 % * 3.09 % * 3.12 %

  23. Performance of Preference Embedding HitRatio@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 2.66% 2.66% 2.66% 4.32% 4.32% 4.32% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% MF 3.02% 3.93% 4.22% 7.11% 8.49% 8.93% 1.37% 1.79% 2.00% DeepWalk 3.18% 3.55% 3.54% 11.61% 12.55% 13.08% 1.71% 1.95% 1.95% LINE-2nd 3.44% 3.74% 4.10% 12.79% 13.47% 12.77% 1.62% 1.60% 1.14% Proposed PE 3.54 % * 4.22 % 4.51 % 12.95 % * 13.74 % * 14.20 % * 2.08 % * 2.15 % * 2.19 % mAP@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 3.27 % 3.27 % 3.27 % 5.03% 5.03% 5.03% 1.04% 1.04% 1.04% MF 1.87% 2.34% 2.60% 4.65% 5.85% 6.16% 1.88% 2.44% 2.81% DeepWalk 1.82% 2.10% 1.99% 8.73% 9.47% 10.01% 2.66% 2.70% 2.55% LINE-2nd 2.00% 2.10% 2.38% 9.95% 10.64% 10.09% 1.84% 1.60% 1.44% Proposed PE 2.08% 2.55% 2.71% 10.14 % 10.86 % * 11.31 % 2.86 % * 3.09 % * 3.12 %

  24. Performance of Preference Embedding HitRatio@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 2.66% 2.66% 2.66% 4.32% 4.32% 4.32% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% MF 3.02% 3.93% 4.22% 7.11% 8.49% 8.93% 1.37% 1.79% 2.00% DeepWalk 3.18% 3.55% 3.54% 11.61% 12.55% 13.08% 1.71% 1.95% 1.95% LINE-2nd 3.44% 3.74% 4.10% 12.79% 13.47% 12.77% 1.62% 1.60% 1.14% Proposed PE 3.54 % * 4.22 % 4.51 % 12.95 % * 13.74 % * 14.20 % * 2.08 % * 2.15 % * 2.19 % mAP@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 3.27 % 3.27 % 3.27 % 5.03% 5.03% 5.03% 1.04% 1.04% 1.04% MF 1.87% 2.34% 2.60% 4.65% 5.85% 6.16% 1.88% 2.44% 2.81% DeepWalk 1.82% 2.10% 1.99% 8.73% 9.47% 10.01% 2.66% 2.70% 2.55% LINE-2nd 2.00% 2.10% 2.38% 9.95% 10.64% 10.09% 1.84% 1.60% 1.44% Proposed PE 2.08% 2.55% 2.71% 10.14 % 10.86 % * 11.31 % 2.86 % * 3.09 % * 3.12 %

  25. Performance of Preference Embedding HitRatio@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 2.66% 2.66% 2.66% 4.32% 4.32% 4.32% 0.92% 0.92% 0.92% MF 3.02% 3.93% 4.22% 7.11% 8.49% 8.93% 1.37% 1.79% 2.00% DeepWalk 3.18% 3.55% 3.54% 11.61% 12.55% 13.08% 1.71% 1.95% 1.95% LINE-2nd 3.44% 3.74% 4.10% 12.79% 13.47% 12.77% 1.62% 1.60% 1.14% Proposed PE 3.54 % * 4.22 % 4.51 % 12.95 % * 13.74 % * 14.20 % * 2.08 % * 2.15 % * 2.19 % mAP@10 lastfm-1k (window=5) KKBOX (window=5) MSD (original) d = 16 d = 32 d = 64 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 d = 64 d = 128 d = 256 Popularity 3.27 % 3.27 % 3.27 % 5.03% 5.03% 5.03% 1.04% 1.04% 1.04% MF 1.87% 2.34% 2.60% 4.65% 5.85% 6.16% 1.88% 2.44% 2.81% DeepWalk 1.82% 2.10% 1.99% 8.73% 9.47% 10.01% 2.66% 2.70% 2.55% LINE-2nd 2.00% 2.10% 2.38% 9.95% 10.64% 10.09% 1.84% 1.60% 1.44% Proposed PE 2.08% 2.55% 2.71% 10.14 % 10.86 % * 11.31 % 2.86 % * 3.09 % * 3.12 %

  26. Extension Work

  27. Extension Work Multiple 
 Queries:

  28. Extension Work Multiple 
 Queries:

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend

Ranked Query Processing: Relevance a) Order-based Paradigm Preference Q Kevin Chen-Chuan

Ranked Query Processing: Relevance a) Order-based Paradigm Preference Q Kevin Chen-Chuan

Ranking Ordering according to the degree of some fuzzy notions: Similarity (or dissimilarity) Ranked Query Processing: Relevance a) Order-based Paradigm Preference Q Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang ranking 2 Query models for

295 views • 13 slides
3. Preference Learning Techniques a. Learning Utility Functions b. Learning Preference

3. Preference Learning Techniques a. Learning Utility Functions b. Learning Preference

AGENDA 1. Preference Learning Tasks 2. Performance Assessment and Loss Functions 3. Preference Learning Techniques a. Learning Utility Functions b. Learning Preference Relations c. Structured Output Prediction d. Model-Based Preference

583 views • 39 slides
Overview n Melody-Based Retrieval n Audio-Score Alignment n Music Fingerprinting 2 Carnegie

Overview n Melody-Based Retrieval n Audio-Score Alignment n Music Fingerprinting 2 Carnegie

Week 10A Query-by-Humming and Music Fingerprinting Roger B. Dannenberg Professor of Computer Science, Art and Music Carnegie Mellon University Overview n Melody-Based Retrieval n Audio-Score Alignment n Music Fingerprinting 2 Carnegie Mellon

658 views • 29 slides
Preference Policy Recommendations PREPARED BY Heidi Aggeler, Managing Director Denver, Colorado

Preference Policy Recommendations PREPARED BY Heidi Aggeler, Managing Director Denver, Colorado

City and County of Denver Preference Policy Recommendations PREPARED BY Heidi Aggeler, Managing Director Denver, Colorado 80220 970.880.1415 x102 heidi@rootpolicy.com Considerations for a Preference Policy Primary goal: To foster stable

585 views • 17 slides
Preference Litigation ASK LLP What is a preference? A preference is a payment made by an

Preference Litigation ASK LLP What is a preference? A preference is a payment made by an

Preference Litigation ASK LLP What is a preference? A preference is a payment made by an insolvent debtor that favors certain creditors over others. The causes of action to avoid and recover preferential payments are codified in 11

853 views • 39 slides
Planarity Embedding Embedding For a given graph G = ( V , E ) , an embedding (into R 2 ) assigns

Planarity Embedding Embedding For a given graph G = ( V , E ) , an embedding (into R 2 ) assigns

Planarity Embedding Embedding For a given graph G = ( V , E ) , an embedding (into R 2 ) assigns each vertex a coordinate and each edge a (not necessarily straight) line connecting the corresponding coordinates. 0 1 3 4 1 1 0 2 5 2 5

754 views • 18 slides
Graph Drawing Embedding Embedding For a given graph G = ( V , E ) , an embedding (into R 2 )

Graph Drawing Embedding Embedding For a given graph G = ( V , E ) , an embedding (into R 2 )

Graph Drawing Embedding Embedding For a given graph G = ( V , E ) , an embedding (into R 2 ) assigns each vertex a coordinate and each edge a (not necessarily straight) line connecting the corresponding coordinates. 0 1 3 4 1 1 0 2 5 2

541 views • 18 slides
Query Optimization Through the Looking Glass Some Lessons From Building an LLVM-Based Query

Query Optimization Through the Looking Glass Some Lessons From Building an LLVM-Based Query

Query Optimization Through the Looking Glass Some Lessons From Building an LLVM-Based Query Compiler Viktor Leis Technische Universitt Mnchen Introduction: Query Optimization HJ B cardinality cost INL B T SELECT ... estimation

679 views • 25 slides
Final Project: Music Preference Mackenzie McCreery, Karrie Chen, Alexander Solomon Introduction

Final Project: Music Preference Mackenzie McCreery, Karrie Chen, Alexander Solomon Introduction

Final Project: Music Preference Mackenzie McCreery, Karrie Chen, Alexander Solomon Introduction Physiological data Use has been increasing in User Experience (UX) research Its sensors record the involuntary physiological responses of

976 views • 30 slides
CAS CS 460/660 Introduction to Database Systems Query Evaluation II 1.1 Cost-based Query

CAS CS 460/660 Introduction to Database Systems Query Evaluation II 1.1 Cost-based Query

CAS CS 460/660 Introduction to Database Systems Query Evaluation II 1.1 Cost-based Query Sub-System Select * Queries From Blah B Where B.blah = blah Query Parser Query Optimizer Plan Plan Cost Catalog Manager Generator Estimator

711 views • 44 slides
Query Execu:on Declara:ve Query (SQL) We start from

Query Execu:on Declara:ve Query (SQL) We start from

SQL The Query Language R & G - Chapter 5 Based on Slides from UC Berkeley and book. 2 Query Execu:on Declara:ve Query (SQL) We start from

689 views • 34 slides
Query Execu:on Declara:ve Query (SQL) We start from

Query Execu:on Declara:ve Query (SQL) We start from

SQL III The Query Language R & G - Chapter 5 Based on Slides from UC Berkeley and book. Query Execu:on Declara:ve Query (SQL) We start from here

1.02k views • 64 slides
3. Preference Learning Techniques 4. Complexity of Preference Learning 5. Conclusions 1 ECAI

3. Preference Learning Techniques 4. Complexity of Preference Learning 5. Conclusions 1 ECAI

AGENDA 1. Preference Learning Tasks 2. Performance Assessment and Loss Functions 3. Preference Learning Techniques 4. Complexity of Preference Learning 5. Conclusions 1 ECAI 2012 Tutorial on Preference Learning | Part 5 | J. Frnkranz &

478 views • 6 slides
1 Logic-based Markup and Logic-based Markup and Query Language Query Language Eight

1 Logic-based Markup and Logic-based Markup and Query Language Query Language Eight

Overview Semantic Streams: a Framework for Composable Motivation Semantic Interpretation of Sensor What are Semantic Streams? Data Logic-based Markup and Query Language Kamin Whitehouse, Feng Zhao, and Jie Liu Query Processing

444 views • 5 slides
Personalized Recommendations for Music Genre Exploration Yu Liang, Martijn Willemsen HTI Group,

Personalized Recommendations for Music Genre Exploration Yu Liang, Martijn Willemsen HTI Group,

Personalized Recommendations for Music Genre Exploration Yu Liang, Martijn Willemsen HTI Group, Eindhoven University of Technology Jheronimus Academy of Data Science Liang, Yu, and Martijn C. Willemsen. "Personalized Recommendations for

513 views • 26 slides
MUSIC THERAPY MUSIC THERAPY What is music therapy? Music therapy is simply the process of using

MUSIC THERAPY MUSIC THERAPY What is music therapy? Music therapy is simply the process of using

MUSIC THERAPY MUSIC THERAPY What is music therapy? Music therapy is simply the process of using music to change a persons behaviour or provide memories to improve clarity. What is music therapy? Music can alter moods to manage

996 views • 30 slides
R e d f i s h T h e n e w s t a n d a r d f o r a S o f t w a r e

R e d f i s h T h e n e w s t a n d a r d f o r a S o f t w a r e

R e d f i s h T h e n e w s t a n d a r d f o r a S o f t w a r e D e f i n e d I n f r a s t r u c t u r e B r u n o C o r n e c F L O S S I T A J a n u a r y 2 0

583 views • 18 slides
of Universal Constructions Eurosys 2020 Andreia Correia University of Neuchtel Pascal Felber

of Universal Constructions Eurosys 2020 Andreia Correia University of Neuchtel Pascal Felber

Persistent Memory and the Rise of Universal Constructions Eurosys 2020 Andreia Correia University of Neuchtel Pascal Felber University of Neuchtel Pedro Ramalhete Cisco Systems Persistent Memory Persistent Memory (or Non-Volatile

438 views • 21 slides
Profiling Platform Storage Using IO500 and Mistral Nolan Monnier, Jay Lofstead , Margaret Lawson,

Profiling Platform Storage Using IO500 and Mistral Nolan Monnier, Jay Lofstead , Margaret Lawson,

Profiling Platform Storage Using IO500 and Mistral Nolan Monnier, Jay Lofstead , Margaret Lawson, Matthew Curry PDSW 2019 SAND2019-14085 C Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology and

584 views • 21 slides
Mostly-Optimistic Concurrency Control for Highly Contended Dynamic Workloads on 1000 cores

Mostly-Optimistic Concurrency Control for Highly Contended Dynamic Workloads on 1000 cores

Mostly-Optimistic Concurrency Control for Highly Contended Dynamic Workloads on 1000 cores Tianzheng Wang , University of Toronto Hideaki Kimura*, Hewlett Packard Labs * Currently with Oracle OLTP on modern & future hardware Multi-socket

377 views • 20 slides
HP FLEX FABRIC NETWORKING DATA CENTER SOLUTIONS Mladen vraka Networking Sales Specialist

HP FLEX FABRIC NETWORKING DATA CENTER SOLUTIONS Mladen vraka Networking Sales Specialist

HP FLEX FABRIC NETWORKING DATA CENTER SOLUTIONS Mladen vraka Networking Sales Specialist Hewlett Packard mladen.svraka@hp.com Trends Creating Data Center Network Challenges Trends Challenges Complexity Virtualization

514 views • 24 slides
F1 IT Martin Hingley, ITCandor Agenda Motor racing challenges Related IT and data

F1 IT Martin Hingley, ITCandor Agenda Motor racing challenges Related IT and data

F1 IT Martin Hingley, ITCandor Agenda Motor racing challenges Related IT and data issues F1 IT solutions Lessons for the rest of us Where the F1 technical directors came from Mercedes Williams A technical sector akin

569 views • 11 slides
OVN: Open Virtual Network for Open vSwitch Russell Bryant (@russellbryant) Kyle Mestery

OVN: Open Virtual Network for Open vSwitch Russell Bryant (@russellbryant) Kyle Mestery

OVN: Open Virtual Network for Open vSwitch Russell Bryant (@russellbryant) Kyle Mestery (@mestery) Justin Pettit (@Justin_D_Pettit) Virtual Networking Overview Provides a logical network abstraction on top of a physical network VM1 VM2

584 views • 33 slides
Technology Transition for CHERI Opportunities for Research Robert N. M. Watson , Simon W. Moore,

Technology Transition for CHERI Opportunities for Research Robert N. M. Watson , Simon W. Moore,

Technology Transition for CHERI Opportunities for Research Robert N. M. Watson , Simon W. Moore, Peter Sewell, Peter G. Neumann Hesham Almatary, Jonathan Anderson, John Baldwin, Hadrien Barrel, Ruslan Bukin, David Chisnall, James Clarke, Nirav

351 views • 16 slides

More recommend