Recommendation is the task of providing personalized suggestions to users based on their preferences and behavior.
Approximate nearest neighbor (ANN) search is widely used in the retrieval stage of large-scale recommendation systems. In this stage, candidate items are indexed using their learned embedding vectors, and ANN search is executed for each user (or item) query to retrieve a set of relevant items. However, ANN-based retrieval has two key limitations. First, item embeddings and their indices are typically learned in separate stages: indexing is often performed offline after embeddings are trained, which can yield suboptimal retrieval quality-especially for newly created items. Second, although ANN offers sublinear query time, it must still be run for every request, incurring substantial computation cost at industry scale. In this paper, we propose MultiFaceted Learnable Index (MFLI), a scalable, real-time retrieval paradigm that learns multifaceted item embeddings and indices within a unified framework and eliminates ANN search at serving time. Specifically, we construct a multifaceted hierarchical codebook via residual quantization of item embeddings and co-train the codebook with the embeddings. We further introduce an efficient multifaceted indexing structure and mechanisms that support real-time updates. At serving time, the learned hierarchical indices are used directly to identify relevant items, avoiding ANN search altogether. Extensive experiments on real-world data with billions of users show that MFLI improves recall on engagement tasks by up to 11.8\%, cold-content delivery by up to 57.29\%, and semantic relevance by 13.5\% compared with prior state-of-the-art methods. We also deploy MFLI in the system and report online experimental results demonstrating improved engagement, less popularity bias, and higher serving efficiency.
We extend directed quantum circuit synthesis (DQCS) with reinforcement learning from purely discrete gate selection to parameterized quantum state preparation with continuous single-qubit rotations \(R_x\), \(R_y\), and \(R_z\). We compare two training regimes: a one-stage agent that jointly selects the gate type, the affected qubit(s), and the rotation angle; and a two-stage variant that first proposes a discrete circuit and subsequently optimizes the rotation angles with Adam using parameter-shift gradients. Using Gymnasium and PennyLane, we evaluate Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) and Advantage Actor--Critic (A2C) on systems comprising two to ten qubits and on targets of increasing complexity with \(λ\) ranging from one to five. Whereas A2C does not learn effective policies in this setting, PPO succeeds under stable hyperparameters (one-stage: learning rate approximately \(5\times10^{-4}\) with a self-fidelity-error threshold of 0.01; two-stage: learning rate approximately \(10^{-4}\)). Both approaches reliably reconstruct computational basis states (between 83\% and 99\% success) and Bell states (between 61\% and 77\% success). However, scalability saturates for \(λ\) of approximately three to four and does not extend to ten-qubit targets even at \(λ=2\). The two-stage method offers only marginal accuracy gains while requiring around three times the runtime. For practicality under a fixed compute budget, we therefore recommend the one-stage PPO policy, provide explicit synthesized circuits, and contrast with a classical variational baseline to outline avenues for improved scalability.
Recommender systems shape individual choices through feedback loops in which user behavior and algorithmic recommendations coevolve over time. The systemic effects of these loops remain poorly understood, in part due to unrealistic assumptions in existing simulation studies. We propose a feedback-loop model that captures implicit feedback, periodic retraining, probabilistic adoption of recommendations, and heterogeneous recommender systems. We apply the framework on online retail and music streaming data and analyze systemic effects of the feedback loop. We find that increasing recommender adoption may lead to a progressive diversification of individual consumption, while collective demand is redistributed in model- and domain-dependent ways, often amplifying popularity concentration. Temporal analyses further reveal that apparent increases in individual diversity observed in static evaluations are illusory: when adoption is fixed and time unfolds, individual diversity consistently decreases across all models. Our results highlight the need to move beyond static evaluations and explicitly account for feedback-loop dynamics when designing recommender systems.
While Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on general-purpose language tasks, their deployment in regulated and data-sensitive domains, including insurance, remains limited. Leveraging millions of historical warranty claims, we propose a locally deployed governance-aware language modeling component that generates structured corrective-action recommendations from unstructured claim narratives. We fine-tune pretrained LLMs using Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA), scoping the model to an initial decision module within the claim processing pipeline to speed up claim adjusters' decisions. We assess this module using a multi-dimensional evaluation framework that combines automated semantic similarity metrics with human evaluation, enabling a rigorous examination of both practical utility and predictive accuracy. Our results show that domain-specific fine-tuning substantially outperforms commercial general-purpose and prompt-based LLMs, with approximately 80% of the evaluated cases achieving near-identical matches to ground-truth corrective actions. Overall, this study provides both theoretical and empirical evidence to prove that domain-adaptive fine-tuning can align model output distributions more closely with real-world operational data, demonstrating its promise as a reliable and governable building block for insurance applications.
Estimating consumer preferences is central to many problems in economics and marketing. This paper develops a flexible framework for learning individual preferences from partial ranking information by interpreting observed rankings as collections of pairwise comparisons with logistic choice probabilities. We model latent utility as the sum of interpretable product attributes, item fixed effects, and a low-rank user-item factor structure, enabling both interpretability and information sharing across consumers and items. We further correct for selection in which comparisons are observed: a comparison is recorded only if both items enter the consumer's consideration set, inducing exposure bias toward frequently encountered items. We model pair observability as the product of item-level observability propensities and estimate these propensities with a logistic model for the marginal probability that an item is observable. Preference parameters are then estimated by maximizing an inverse-probability-weighted (IPW), ridge-regularized log-likelihood that reweights observed comparisons toward a target comparison population. To scale computation, we propose a stochastic gradient descent (SGD) algorithm based on inverse-probability resampling, which draws comparisons in proportion to their IPW weights. In an application to transaction data from an online wine retailer, the method improves out-of-sample recommendation performance relative to a popularity-based benchmark, with particularly strong gains in predicting purchases of previously unconsumed products.
Generative models are increasingly used in recommender systems, both for modeling user behavior as event sequences and for integrating large language models into recommendation pipelines. A key challenge in this setting is the extremely large cardinality of item spaces, which makes training generative models difficult and introduces a vocabulary gap between natural language and item identifiers. Semantic identifiers (semantic IDs), which represent items as sequences of low-cardinality tokens, have recently emerged as an effective solution to this problem. However, existing approaches generate semantic identifiers of fixed length, assigning the same description length to all items. This is inefficient, misaligned with natural language, and ignores the highly skewed frequency structure of real-world catalogs, where popular items and rare long-tail items exhibit fundamentally different information requirements. In parallel, the emergent communication literature studies how agents develop discrete communication protocols, often producing variable-length messages in which frequent concepts receive shorter descriptions. Despite the conceptual similarity, these ideas have not been systematically adopted in recommender systems. In this work, we bridge recommender systems and emergent communication by introducing variable-length semantic identifiers for recommendation. We propose a discrete variational autoencoder with Gumbel-Softmax reparameterization that learns item representations of adaptive length under a principled probabilistic framework, avoiding the instability of REINFORCE-based training and the fixed-length constraints of prior semantic ID methods.
Integrating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning into Semantic ID-based recommendation foundation models (such as OpenOneRec) often paradoxically degrades recommendation performance. We identify the root cause as textual inertia from the General Subspace, where verbose reasoning dominates inference and causes the model to neglect critical Semantic ID. To address this, we propose a training-free Inference-Time Subspace Alignment framework. By compressing reasoning chains and applying bias-subtracted contrastive decoding, our approach mitigates ungrounded textual drift. Experiments show this effectively calibrates inference, allowing foundation models to leverage reasoning without sacrificing ID-grounded accuracy.
Click models are a central component of learning and evaluation in recommender systems, yet most existing models are designed for single ranked-list interfaces. In contrast, modern recommender platforms increasingly use complex interfaces such as carousels, which consist of multiple swipeable lists that enable complex user browsing behaviors. In this paper, we study position-based click models in carousel interfaces and examine optimization methods, model structure, and alignment with user behavior. We propose three novel position-based models tailored to carousels, including the first position-based model without latent variables that incorporates observed examination signals derived from eye tracking data, called the Observed Examination Position-Based Model (OEPBM). We develop a general implementation of these carousel click models, supporting multiple optimization techniques and conduct experiments comparing gradient-based methods with classical approaches, namely expectation-maximization and maximum likelihood estimation. Our results show that gradient-based optimization consistently achieve better click likelihoods. Among the evaluated models, the OEPBM achieves the strongest performance in click prediction and produces examination patterns that most closely align to user behavior. However, we also demonstrate that strong click fit does not imply realistic modeling of user examination and browsing patterns. This reveals a fundamental limitation of click-only models in complex interfaces and the need for incorporating additional behavioral signals when designing click models for carousel-based recommender systems.
On two-sided matching platforms such as online dating and recruiting, recommendation algorithms often aim to maximize the total number of matches. However, this objective creates an imbalance, where some users receive far too many matches while many others receive very few and eventually abandon the platform. Retaining users is crucial for many platforms, such as those that depend heavily on subscriptions. Some may use fairness objectives to solve the problem of match maximization. However, fairness in itself is not the ultimate objective for many platforms, as users do not suddenly reward the platform simply because exposure is equalized. In practice, where user retention is often the ultimate goal, casually relying on fairness will leave the optimization of retention up to luck. In this work, instead of maximizing matches or axiomatically defining fairness, we formally define the new problem setting of maximizing user retention in two-sided matching platforms. To this end, we introduce a dynamic learning-to-rank (LTR) algorithm called Matching for Retention (MRet). Unlike conventional algorithms for two-sided matching, our approach models user retention by learning personalized retention curves from each user's profile and interaction history. Based on these curves, MRet dynamically adapts recommendations by jointly considering the retention gains of both the user receiving recommendations and those who are being recommended, so that limited matching opportunities can be allocated where they most improve overall retention. Naturally but importantly, empirical evaluations on synthetic and real-world datasets from a major online dating platform show that MRet achieves higher user retention, since conventional methods optimize matches or fairness rather than retention.
Foundation models, including vision language models, are increasingly used in automated driving to interpret scenes, recommend actions, and generate natural language explanations. However, existing evaluation methods primarily assess outcome based performance, such as safety and trajectory accuracy, without determining whether model decisions reflect human relevant considerations. As a result, it remains unclear whether explanations produced by such models correspond to genuine reason responsive decision making or merely post hoc rationalizations. This limitation is especially significant in safety critical domains because it can create false confidence. To address this gap, we propose CARE Drive, Context Aware Reasons Evaluation for Driving, a model agnostic framework for evaluating reason responsiveness in vision language models applied to automated driving. CARE Drive compares baseline and reason augmented model decisions under controlled contextual variation to assess whether human reasons causally influence decision behavior. The framework employs a two stage evaluation process. Prompt calibration ensures stable outputs. Systematic contextual perturbation then measures decision sensitivity to human reasons such as safety margins, social pressure, and efficiency constraints. We demonstrate CARE Drive in a cyclist overtaking scenario involving competing normative considerations. Results show that explicit human reasons significantly influence model decisions, improving alignment with expert recommended behavior. However, responsiveness varies across contextual factors, indicating uneven sensitivity to different types of reasons. These findings provide empirical evidence that reason responsiveness in foundation models can be systematically evaluated without modifying model parameters.