Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Computer Science 00 (2018) 000–000
Procedia Computer
Procedia Science
Computer 14300
Science (2018) 387–394
(2018) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

8th International Conference on Advances in Computing and Communication (ICACC-2018)

8th International Conference on Advances in Computing and Communication (ICACC-2018)
Matrix
Matrix factorization
factorization in
in Cross-domain
Cross-domain Recommendations
Recommendations Framework
Framework
by Shared Users Latent Factors
by Shared Users Latent Factors
Ashish K. Sahua,∗ a
a,∗, Pragya Dwivedia
a Motilal
Ashish K. Sahu , Pragya Dwivedi
Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad, Allahabad-211004, India
a Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad, Allahabad-211004, India

Abstract
Abstract
Matrix factorization is one of the most commonly used method of collaborative filtering (CF) for generating personalized recom-
Matrix factorization
mendations to users. is
A one
mainoflimitation
the most of
commonly
CF is thatused method
It fully of collaborative
depends on observedfiltering (CF)may
ratings and for fail
generating
if these personalized
observed ratingsrecom-
are
mendations to users.
in limited amount A main
called limitation
sparsity of CF
problem. is that It fully
Addressing this depends
problem,oncross-domain
observed ratings and may fail ifcame
recommendations theseinto
observed ratings
existence are
where
in limited amount called sparsity problem. Addressing this problem, cross-domain recommendations came
transfer learning mechanism is applied to mitigate sparsity problem and increase performance of the target domain using other into existence where
transfer learning
related source mechanism is applied to mitigate sparsity problem and increase performance of the target domain using other
domains.
related source we
In this paper, domains.
propose the method for knowledge transfer from source domain to target domain through shared users latent
In this paper,
factors. Firstly,we
wepropose the method
apply traditional for knowledge
matrix factorizationtransfer from source
(MF) method domain
in source to target
domain domain
to learn latentthrough
factors shared
of usersusers
and latent
items
factors. Firstly, we apply traditional matrix factorization (MF) method in source domain to learn latent factors
through objective function of MF. After that, learned latent factors of users are directly transferred to target domain. Modify of users andobjec-
items
through objective
tive function of MFfunction
and learnof MF. After that,
users/items learned
latent latent
factors factors
of the targetofdomain.
users are directly
Finally, transferred
prediction on to target domain.
unobserved ratingsModify
in theobjec-
target
tive function
domain of MF
is made andinner
using learnproduct
users/items latent factors
of respective of the
user and target
item domain.
latent factors.Finally, prediction
Experimental on unobserved
results demonstrateratings in the
that our target
proposed
domain is made using inner product of respective user and item latent factors. Experimental results
method substantially work well from other without and with transfer learning methods in terms of MAE and RMSE metrics. demonstrate that our proposed
method substantially work well from other without and with transfer learning methods in terms of MAE and RMSE metrics.
c 2018

© 2018 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published byby Elsevier
Elsevier B.V.
B.V.
c 2018
 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open
Selection and access article
peer-review underunder the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection and peer-review under responsibility
responsibility ofof the
the scientific
scientific committee
committee ofof the
the 8th
8th International
International Conference
Conference on
on Advances
Advances in
in
Selection and
Computing andpeer-review
Communicationunder(ICACC-2018).
responsibility of the scientific committee of the 8th International Conference on Advances in
(ICACC-2018).
Computing and Communication (ICACC-2018).
Keywords: Collaborative filtering; Matrix factorization; Transfer learning; Cross-domain recommendations
Keywords: Collaborative filtering; Matrix factorization; Transfer learning; Cross-domain recommendations

1. Introduction
1. Introduction
In many e-commerce websites, users have millions of items options in which they want to purchase relevant items
outInofmany e-commerce
millions of items. websites,
Exploringusers
such have millions
enormous of items
items space options in which they
is time consuming andwant to manageable
is not purchase relevant items
for most of
out of millions of items. Exploring such enormous items space is time consuming and is not manageable
users in many situations. Solving this problem, recommender systems have become very useful tool for generating for most of
users in many situations. Solving this problem, recommender systems have become very useful
personalized recommendations to users in e-commerce applications. The mainly used recommendation techniques tool for generating
personalized recommendations
[5, 1] are: content-based, to usersfiltering
collaborative in e-commerce applications.
and hybrid. The mainly
Among them, used recommendation
collaborative filtering (CF) is techniques
one of the
[5, 1] are: content-based, collaborative filtering and hybrid. Among them, collaborative
most promising techniques in recent years. It can also be categorized in two types: memory-based filtering (CF)
and is one of
model the
based
most promising techniques in recent years. It can also be categorized in two types: memory-based and model based

∗ Ashish K. Sahu
∗ Ashish K. Sahu sahuashishcs@gmail.com
E-mail address:
E-mail address: sahuashishcs@gmail.com
1877-0509 
1877-0509 ©c 2018 The Authors.
2018 The Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier
Elsevier B.V.
B.V.
1877-0509
This
This is
is an c 2018
anopen
open Thearticle
access
access Authors.
article Published
under
underthethe byBY-NC-ND
CCCC Elsevier B.V.
BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an and
Selection
Selection openpeer-review
and access article
peer-review under
under
under the CC BY-NC-ND
responsibility
responsibility ofofthe license
thescientific(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
scientific committee
committee ofofthethe
8th8th International
International Conference
Conference on Advances
on Advances in Computing
in Computing and
Selection
and and peer-review
Communication
Communication under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 8th International Conference on Advances in Computing and
(ICACC-2018).
(ICACC-2018).
10.1016/j.procs.2018.10.410
Communication (ICACC-2018).
388 Ashish K. Sahu et al. / Procedia Computer Science 143 (2018) 387–394
2 Ashish K Sahu / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2018) 000–000

. Memory-based techniques are not suitable for large amount of dataset due to calculation of similarities between
users/items is too expensive, on the other hand model-based techniques are flexible to handle large amount of dataset.
Matrix factorization [MF] [11] is one of the CF model-based methods in which decomposes the user-item matrix into
two sub-matrices and tries to explain the ratings in small number of latent factors of users and items. Latent factors
of items show distribution of items on latent factors , and users latent factors show distribution of users taste on those
factors.
All methods of CF are fully depend on density (available ratings) of user-item rating matrix of the dataset. However,
in real-world scenarios, rating matrix is very sparse due to users provide the ratings on few items out of millions of
items. Handling this problem, cross-domain recommendations [9, 2, 7] have been proposed using exploit knowledge
from other related domains to improve recommendations quality of the target domain. Here, other domains means
additional datasets which are called source domains, and dataset which is being used of recommendations called
target domain. The main hypothesis in cross-domain is that some common properties should overlap between
domains. Exploiting knowledge from one or more than one domains to other domain is called transfer learning [15]
mechanism which is new paradigm of machine learning, and combination of recommender systems and transfer
learning is called cross-domain recommendations.
Several authors [14, 3, 16, 18] have proposed methods to exploit knowledge from source domain with their prospec-
tives. It can be categorized four types [6] based on overlapping of users/items, i.e., users overlap, items overlap, both
users and items overlap and neither users nor items overlap.
Users overlap: A first paper has been presented by Winoto and Tang [19] in 2008. The authors analyzed that the
correlations of different domains based on the categories of items to provide the cross-domain recommendations.
Nonetheless, Berkovsky et al. [2] presented the same type of work and evaluated that importing user profile data
from other domains yields more accurate predictions. Other type of work has been done by Pan and Yang [17] using
like/dislike information treat as source domain.
Items overlap, users and items overlap: In both type of categories, a very less amount of work have been done
because it is too difficult to find shared items between the domains.
Neither users nor items overlap: Li et al. [13] have proposed a method based on cluster-level rating patterns for
knowledge transferring between domains. The authors extended their work by incorporating probabilistic model [12].
Both methods are based on cluster-level rating patterns to establish the bridge between domains.

In this paper, we focus on first type of category in which users are shared between the domains. We propose the
method to exploit knowledge from source domain (D s ) to improve accuracy performance of the target domain (Dt )
using shared latent factors of users. The proposed method consists of three fold:

• Apply MF method in source domain to learn latent factors of users and items through objective function of MF.
• Modify objective function of MF for exploiting learned latent factors of users in source domain, and learn
users/items latent factors of the target domain.
• In last fold, predict unobserved ratings in target domain using inner product of respective users and items latent
factors.

Nomenclature

Dk Domain k
k k
Rk ∈ RN ×M User-item rating matrix of domain k
k N k ×M k
I ∈R , R ∈ {0, 1} Indicator user-item matrix of domain k
Uik ∈ R1× f Vector of user i latent factors in domain k
V kj ∈ R1× f Vector of item j latent factors in domain k
k
m Number of users in domain k
nk Number of items in domain k
r̂i, j Prediction in the target domain on item j to user i
 Ashish K. Sahu et al. / Procedia Computer Science 143 (2018) 387–394 389
Ashish K Sahu / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2018) 000–000 3

f Dimension space of latent factors

E An objective function

2. Related work

Nowadays recommendation system tools are playing central role in many e-commerce companies. It provides
recommendations to users based on historical ratings. There are various techniques [5] for generating recommenda-
tions but collaborative filtering is one of well known techniques in recent years. It consists two types: memory-based
and model-based. A first type of method is fully based on memory space, i.e., whole dataset loads at one time,
and prediction can be calculated using statistical tools. Memory-based collaborative filtering consists three steps:
1) Similarity computation 2) Neighborhood selection and 3) Prediction on unobserved ratings. Similarity can be
calculated between users (CF-UU) or between items (CF-II). Here, we only focus on collaborative filtering with
user-user similarity (CF-UU). On other hand mode-based method, matrix factorization is one of most well known
methods which divide user-item rating matrix into two sub matrices, one for users or users latent factors matrix and
other for items latent factors. Both techniques are fully depend on historical ratings, and if these ratings are in limited
amount, it may fails for recommendations.
Solving this problem, cross-domain recommendations came into existence by transfer learning mechanism from
other related domains. It exploits knowledge from source domain for improving accuracy performance of the target
domain. Berkovsky et al. [2] proposed the method for cross-domain recommendations using aggregating user rating
vectors from different domains and apply traditional memory based collaborative filtering. Similarly, Hu et al. [8]
have proposed the method for cross-domain version of a matrix factorization, in which an augmented user-item rating
matrix is constructed by horizontally concatenating all matrices. Thus MF model can be used to obtain the latent user
factors and latent item factors. These type of methods are used multi-task transfer learning where both domains are
used simultaneously.

In multi-task transfer learning, both domains (source and target) are used simultaneously to increase accuracy of
the target domain but in case of adoptive transfer learning, first we extract knowledge from source domain and then
extracted knowledge is transfered in the target domain. The novelty of our proposed work is that we have adopted
adaptive transfer learning rather multi-task learning method. We extract knowledge from source domain in terms of
users latent factors, after that these latent factors are transferred into target domain directly. and then prediction on
unobserved ratings can made using inner product of respective users and items latent factors.

3. Proposed method

In our proposed method, we use learned latent factors of users U s as extracted knowledge form source domain D s ,
and then directly transfer to target domain Dt . The intuition is that if users are shared in both domains then distribution
of users taste on those factors may same in both domains, i.e., Uis = Uit . And if these are not equal then an error ξi must
be present, this error should be minimized using any optimization algorithm. The architecture of proposed method is
shown in fig. 1 and major contribution of our proposed method is as follows:
Fold-1: Firstly, we apply traditional matrix factorization in source domain to learn users/items latent factors. The
objective function shows in equation 1. An error E1 (U s , V s ) is minimized using stochastic gradient descent
optimization algorithm. In this equation, two parameters ((U s , V s ) are optimized through partial derivative al-
ternatively using equation 2.
     
E1 (U s , V s ) = min I s
 (r s
− U s sT 2
V ) + λ U s 2 + V s 2 (1)
i, j i, j i j i j
U∗s ,V∗s
(i, j∈Rms ×ns )

∂E
θ ←θ−α∗ (2)
∂θ
4 Ashish K Sahu / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2018) 000–000

390 Ashish K. Sahu et al. / Procedia Computer Science 143 (2018) 387–394

Fig. 1. Architecture of proposed method for cross-domain recommendations

Uis = Uis + α(eisj V js − λUis )

V js = V js + α(eisj Uis − λV js )

where eisj = ruis − Uis V js T and  operator is element wise product.

Fold-2: After that, learned users latent factors (knowledge of source domain) are directly transfer to target domain.
Knowledge can adopt by modifying the objective function of traditional matrix factorization. It can be followed
as:
     
E2 (U t , V t ) = min I t
 (r t
− U t tT 2
V ) + λ U t 2 + V t 2 + c ∗ (ξ )2 (3)
i, j i, j i j i j i
U∗t ,V∗t
(i, j∈R )
m t ×nt

Similarly, an error E2 is minimized using stochastic gradient descent optimization algorithm.

 Ashish K. Sahu et al. / Procedia Computer Science 143 (2018) 387–394 391
Ashish K Sahu / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2018) 000–000 5

Table 1. Statistics of the dataset after preprocessing

Source domain (D s ) Target domain (Dt )

# users 395 395

# items 6,734 26,415
# ratings 58,132 100,061
density level 0.0219 .0096

 
Uit ← Uit + α ei, j V tj − λUit − cξi

 
V tj ← V tj + α ei, j Uit − λV tj
 
where ξi = Uis − Uit  and eti j = rui
t
− Uit V tj T

Fold-3: After learn both parameters in target domain, the prediction can be made using inner product of respective
users and items latent factors follow as:

T
r̂i, j = Uit V tj (4)

4. Experiment setup and results

In this Section, firstly we describe dataset preprocessing, after that we describe experiment protocols and evaluation
metrics which are used in proposed work, and finally we discuss comparison methods and summery of experimental
results.

4.1. Dataset preprocessing

Our experiments are conducted on Amazon product co-purchasing network metadata 1 . In this dataset, we consider
two type of groups (Book and DVD) where one group as a source domain and other for target. In this paper, we focus
on shard users between the domains so some preprocessing steps are needed as follows:

• we filtered out items those have been rated at-least 10 ratings, and also filtered out users who have rated at-least
50 items in both groups or domains.
• We matched common users using userIDs in both domains, so 395 users are selected randomly. Table 1 shows
the statistics of the filtered dataset.
• We have considered book group and DVD group as source domain and target domain, respectively. We observed
that density level of D s in more compare to Dt .

4.2. Experiment protocols

We have used 5-fold cross-validation process to report assures unbiased results. In this manner, 4 parts as training
and 5th part for testing purpose of target domain. An average value of all 5 test sets as overall evaluation of the method.
We have also used 95% confidence interval while calculating an average value of all test sets. Furthermore, validating
the effectiveness of cross-domain recommendations, we have divided training set (TR) into three sub parts: TR(50%),
TR(75%) and TR(100%).

1 https://snap.stanford.edu/data/amazon-meta.html
392 Ashish K. Sahu et al. / Procedia Computer Science 143 (2018) 387–394
6 Ashish K Sahu / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2018) 000–000

4.3. Evaluation metrics

The proposed and other state-of-the-arts methods are evaluated on the basis of Mean absolute error (MAE) (5) and
Root mean square error (RMSE) (6) to determine rating prediction accuracy.
1   
MAE = ri, j − r̂i, j  (5)
|rT | (i, j)∈r
T


1 
RMS E = (ri, j − r̂i, j )2 (6)
|rT | (i, j)∈r
T

where rT is denote the total number of predicted ratings in target domain. ri, j denotes the actual rating and r̂i, j predicted
rating on item i to user u.

4.4. Comparison methods and parameter settings

We have used three comparison methods with our proposed work: Average filling, collaborative filtering with user-
user similarity, and matrix factorization. In all three comparison methods, we have adopted two type of scenarios,
without transfer and with transfer. In first one, we focused only target domain to evaluate rating prediction, in case of
with transfer, we augmented user-item rating matrix of source domain with target domain to estimate rating prediction.
Second type of scenario called multi-task transfer learning where both domains are used simultaneously. Our proposed
method is based on adaptive transfer learning [15] where knowledge is adopted form source domain and directly
transferred into target domain.
Average filling (AF): This method takes very less time to predict the ratings. We just fill average value of observed
items’ rating given by users in target domain. The prediction as follows:
M
j=1 Ii, j  ri, j
r̂i,∗ = M (7)
j=1 Ii, j

Collaborative filtering with user-user similrity (CF-UU): CF-UU [4] is one of the memory based methods for pro-
viding recommendations to users using top K-NN similar users. We have used constraint Pearson correlation
similarity formula and K = 50 for top k users.
Matrix factorization (MF): MF [10] provides the lower rank approximations of the user-item matrix. The prediction
can be done using two latent factors: user side latent factor and item side latent factor. After learn both latent
factors, prediction can be made through inner product of both factors. We have used λ = .001 as trade-off
parameter, size of latent factors f = 10 and α = .001 are fixed.
Proposed method: The trade-off parameter values are λ = .005, α = .001, and c = .01. The size of latent factor
f = 10 is fixed.

4.5. Summary of the experimental results

We have conducted three set of experiments based on % of training set. In each training set of experiment, we have
compared our proposed method with three state-of-the-art methods using two type of scenarios (with and without
transfer). MAE and RMS E both are used as evaluation metrics. The results are shown in table 2 and 3. The following
observations can be made from the results:

• AF method is poorly compared to the other methods, because of just blindly fill the ratings based on the average
item ratings given by users. One interesting thing is that no much improvement in accuracy while we have used
with transfer method.
 Ashish K. Sahu et al. / Procedia Computer Science 143 (2018) 387–394 393
Ashish K Sahu / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2018) 000–000 7

Table 2. Comparison results for cross-domain recommendations in terms of MAE

% Training set
Methods
TR(50%) TR(75%) TR(100%)
0.8860 0.8848 0.8840
AF (without transfer)
± 0.0038 ±0.0021 ± 0.0031
AF (with transfer) 0.8800 0.8789 0.8786
± 0.0027 ±0.0030 ± 0.0027
CF-UU (with out transfer) 0.8715 0.8688 0.8619
0.0014 ± 0.0028 ± 0.0032
CF-UU (with transfer) 0.8702 0.8684 0.8602
0.0028 ± 0.0043 ± 0.0026
MF (without transfer) 0.8872 0.8632 0. 8550
± 0.0039 ±0.0065 ± 0.0062
MF (with transfer) 0.8511 0.8232 0.7978
± 0.0038 ±0.0021 ± 0.0031
Proposed method (with transfer) 0.8312 0.8028 0.7641
± 0.0042 ±0.0061 ± 0.0015

Table 3. Comparison results for cross-domain recommendations in terms of RMS E

% Training set
Methods
TR(50%) TR(75%) TR(100%)
1.2000 1.1751 1.1599
AF (without transfer)
± 0.0063 ±0.0031 ± 0.0047
AF (with transfer) 1.1791 1.1575 1.1556
± 0.0028 ±0.0039 ± 0.0031
CF-UU (with out transfer) 1.1642 1.1543 1.1538
0.0024 ± 0.0039 ± 0.0014
CF-UU (with transfer) 1.1604 1.1537 1.1485
0.0042 ± 0.0052 ± 0.0062
MF (without transfer) 1.1603 1.1492 1.1456
± 0.0041 ±0.0065 ± 0.0064
MF (with transfer) 1.1501 1.4442 1.1241
±0.0021 ±0.0031 ± 0.0062
Proposed method (with transfer) 1.1384 1.1071 1.0902
± 0.0065 ±0.0022 ± 0.0020

• CF-UU has given better result compare with AF method, but it is too expensive to calculate similarity between
users.
• MF is one of the most widely used methods for the recommendations. It has given better results compare to
both AF and CF-UU using both scenarios.
• The proposed method has lowest MAE and RMSE among all with transfer and without transfer methods. Com-
pare with transfer learning method, we found that our proposed method significantly outperform in terms of
accuracy metrics.

5. Conclusion and Future Direction

In this paper, we have proposed novel method for knowledge transfer from source domain to the target domain
where users are shared. We have used shared latent factors of users for transferring knowledge between domains.
Firstly, we learn latent factors of users/items in source domain through standard objective function of matrix factor-
ization. After that, we learn users/items latent factors of target domain through modified objective function of matrix
factorization. Finally, predict ratings of target domain using inner product of respective user and item latent factors.
We have done three experiments to validate the proposed method using % of training set. The experiments results
show that our proposed method performs significantly better than several non-transfer methods and transfer method.
 394 Ashish K. Sahu et al. / Procedia Computer Science 143 (2018) 387–394
8 Ashish K Sahu / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2018) 000–000

In future, we will extend our method with partial shared users to check how to transfer learning framework is signifi-
cantly effective for cross-domain recommendations.

References

[1] G. Adomavicius and A. Tuzhilin. Toward the next generation of recommender systems: A survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions.
IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering, 17(6):734–749, 2005.
[2] S. Berkovsky, T. Kuflik, and F. Ricci. Cross-Domain Mediation in Collaborative Filtering 2 Cross-Domain Mediation in Collaborative Filtering.
User Modeling, 4511:355–359, 2007.
[3] S. Berkvosky and F. Ricci. Distributed Collaborative Filtering with Domain Specialization. pages 33–40, 2007.
[4] J. Bobadilla, F. Ortega, A. Hernando, and A. Gutiérrez. Recommender systems survey. Knowledge-based systems, 46:109–132, 2013.
[5] L. Candillier, F. Meyer, and M. Boullé. Comparing state-of-the-art collaborative filtering systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4571:
548, 2007.
[6] P. Cremonesi, A. Tripodi, and T. R. Cross-domain recommender systems. ICDMW2011: IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining
Workshops, pages 496–503, 2011.
[7] I. Fernández-Tobı́as, I. Cantador, M. Kaminskas, and F. Ricci. Cross-domain recommender systems: A survey of the state of the art. In Spanish
Conference on Information Retrieval, 2012.
[8] L. Hu, J. Cao, G. Xu, L. Cao, Z. Gu, and C. Zhu. Personalized recommendation via cross-domain triadic factorization. Proceedings of the
22nd international conference on World Wide Web - WWW ’13, pages 595–606, 2013.
[9] M. M. Khan, R. Ibrahim, and I. Ghani. Cross Domain Recommender Systems: A Systematic Literature Review. ACM Computing Surveys, 50
(3):1–34, 2017.
[10] Y. Koren. Factorization meets the neighborhood: A multifaceted collaborative filtering model. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD
International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD ’08, pages 426–434, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.
[11] Y. Koren, R. Bell, and C. Volinsky. Matrix factorization techniques for recommender systems. Computer, 42(8):30–37, Aug 2009.
[12] B. Li, Q. Yang, and X. Xue. Transfer learning for collaborative filtering via a rating-matrix generative model. In Proceedings of the 26th
Annual International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML ’09, pages 617–624, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM.
[13] B. Li, Q. Yang, and X. Xue. Can movies and books collaborate?: Cross-domain collaborative filtering for sparsity reduction. In Proceedings
of the 21st International Jont Conference on Artifical Intelligence, IJCAI’09, pages 2052–2057, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2009. Morgan
Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
[14] H. Liu, Z. Hu, A. Mian, H. Tian, and X. Zhu. A new user similarity model to improve the accuracy of collaborative filtering. Knowledge-Based
Systems, 56(Supplement C):156 – 166, 2014.
[15] S. J. Pan and Q. Yang. A survey on transfer learning. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 22(10):1345–1359, oct 2010.
[16] W. Pan. A survey of transfer learning for collaborative recommendation with auxiliary data. Neurocomputing, 177:447–453, 2016.
[17] W. Pan and Q. Yang. Transfer learning in heterogeneous collaborative filtering domains. Artificial intelligence, 197:39–55, 2013.
[18] A. K. Sahu, P. Dwivedi, and V. Kant. Tags and item features as a bridge for cross-domain recommender systems. Procedia Computer Science,
125:624 – 631, 2018. The 6th International Conference on Smart Computing and Communications.
[19] P. Winoto and T. Tang. If you like the devil wears prada the book, will you also enjoy the devil wears prada the movie? a study of cross-domain
recommendations. New Generation Computing, 26(3):209–225, 2008.