{rfName}
Im

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

138

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Bellogín A.Author

Share

July 27, 2024
Publications
>
Proceedings Paper
No

Implicit vs. explicit trust in social matrix factorization

Publicated to:RecSys 2014 - Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. 317-320 - 2014-10-06 (), DOI: 10.1145/2645710.2645766

Authors: Fazeli, Soude; Loni, Babak; Bellogin, Alejandro; Drachsler, Hendrik; Sloep, Peter

Affiliations

Delft Univ Technol, NL-2628 CD Delft, Netherlands - Author
Open Univ Nederland OUNL, NL-6401 DL Heerlen, Netherlands - Author
Univ Autonoma Madrid, Madrid 28049, Spain - Author

Abstract

Incorporating social trust in Matrix Factorization (MF) methods demonstrably improves accuracy of rating prediction. Such approaches mainly use the trust scores explicitly expressed by users. However, it is often challenging to have users provide explicit trust scores of each other. There exist quite a few works, which propose Trust Metrics (TM) to compute and predict trust scores between users based on their interactions. In this paper, we first evaluate several TMs to find out which one can best predict trust scores compared to the actual trust scores explicitly expressed by users. And, second, we propose to incorporate these trust scores inferred from the candidate TMs into social matrix factorization (MF). We investigate if incorporating the implicit trust scores in MF can make rating prediction as accurate as the MF on explicit trust scores. The reported results support the idea of employing implicit trust into MF whenever explicit trust is not available, since the performance of both models is similar.

Keywords

Implicit trustMatrix factorizationRatingRecommender systemSimilaritySocial network

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from the Field Citation Ratio (FCR) of the Dimensions source, it yields a value of: 7.75, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: Dimensions Aug 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-08-02, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 28
  • Scopus: 43
  • Google Scholar: 66

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-08-02:

  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 71 (PlumX).

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

This work has been carried out with international collaboration, specifically with researchers from: Netherlands.