-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 610
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Method 'recommend' is broken #628
Comments
I don't think the The right method of calling the recommend functions is The first example you posted with the |
Hmm... thanks for explaining. Result make more sense now. For me it was unexpected and definitely such behaviour should be documented in docstring. I thought that items that person liked won't be returned at all. |
btw wanted to say that very much appreciate your work. And especially math documentation/articles. |
hi, i tried to use the newest one but seems like it is not working on my side as usual. It told me index 945 is out of bounds for axis 1 with size 240. |
Hi,
I see a problem with current implementation of "recommend" function.
==== Example of wrong behaviour ====
For Last fm:
current behaviour with default parameters:
most probably expected behaviour (however still not sure if output is correct):
==== Problem ====
There is some problem in
recommend
function logic for classMatrixFactorizationBase
. I might be wrong, but you can't expectuser_items.shape[0] != user_count
and at the same time have current version of class methoduser = self._user_factor(....)
. I think the correct logic should beuser_items.shape[0] > user_count
whereuser_count = max(user_id)
?Consider that by default user most probably will do on of this two calls:
model.recommend(11, user_plays)
- this won't work in current version, but worked in version 0.4.0model.recommend(11, user_plays[11:12])
- this will work in 0.6.1, but then it will get strange behaviour after calling: self._user_factor(userid, user_items, recalculate_user).==== Code snippet with current implementation: ====
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: