To determine a person's personality, we will rely on data from the number oftimes a song is listened to, a person's favorite music genre, and then make recommendations through user colla
Outline đc ⁄⁄ đ88c À, LỆ 4
This thesis identifies issues that need to be addressed to develop music recommendations systems and how they have been handled so far By studying history develop music recommendation methods, theses enable designers and researchers Use accumulated knowledge and experience addresses many open questions that require further exploration The remainder of this thesis is organized as follows:
Chapter 2 describes about Music Recommendation and the Reality of today's music market.
Chapter 3 describes how collaborative filtering and content-based filtering works and reviews its application in Music suggestion system Collaborative filtering depends on a set of human evaluations (called ratings) of items to predict how much a user will like an item that doesn't evaluated Rating data can be collected explicitly or implicitly. Memory-based and Model-based methods have their own advantages and disadvantages Although collaborative filtering is a successful recommendation method, it poses some challenges such as data sparsity, common trends, and cold starts. Final is Chapter 4, in this we will write about the achievement, challenges and development directions of this project.
Overview Algorithm Research <s=<ô=<<s<se=se 11
Application of music recommendation system
Currently, there are many websites and applications that are using music recommendation systems Some popular applications include:
- Spotify: Spotify uses several different algorithms to recommend songs to users, including interest-based algorithms, location-based algorithms, and friends’ preferences- based algorithms.
High accuracy: Spotify uses a number of complex algorithms to recommend songs that match the user's preferences.
Diversity: Spotify provides a huge music store with many different genres.
Convenience: Users can access Spotify from many different devices.
Paid subscription required: To use Spotify's recommended features, users need a paid subscription.
- Apple Music: Apple Music uses a preference-based algorithm to recommend songs to users.
High accuracy: Apple Music uses a complex algorithm to recommend songs that match the user's preferences.
Diversity: Apple Music provides a huge music store with many different genres.
Integration with Apple devices: Apple Music is integrated with Apple devices, making it easy for users to use.
Paid subscription required: To use Apple Music recommended features, users need a paid subscription.
- YouTube Music: YouTube Music uses interest-based algorithms and content-based algorithms to recommend songs to users.
13 e High accuracy: YouTube Music uses a complex algorithm to recommend songs that match the user's preferences. e Diversity: YouTube Music provides a huge music store with many different genres. e Integration with YouTube: YouTube Music is integrated with YouTube, making it easy for users to search and play music.
Defect: e Paid subscription required: To use YouTube Music's recommended features, users need a paid subscription.
In addition, there are a number of other applications that are using music recommendation systems, such as: e Tidal e Amazon Music e Deezer e Pandora e QQ Music e Tencent Music EntertainmentEach application has its own advantages and disadvantages Depending on the user's needs and preferences, the appropriate application can be selected.
Common filtering methods used in Music Recommendation Systems 14
Content-based filtering (CBF) is a powerful technique used in recommender systems, particularly in music platforms like Spotify and Pandora It aims to recommend items (songs in this case) to users based on the intrinsic
14 characteristics of the items themselves, rather than relying on the preferences of other users Here's an overview of how CBF works:
CBF begins by analyzing the attributes of the items In music recommendation, these attributes can include:
Musical aspects: genre, tempo, rhythm, instrumentation, key, mood, lyrics
Metadata: artist, album, release date, popularity Additional information: tags, ratings, reviews
Based on the extracted attributes, individual profiles are created for each item These profiles act as summaries of the item's characteristics.
User preferences are also represented as profiles, often inferred from the user's listening history, saved songs, and explicit ratings.
The system then calculates the similarity between item profiles and user profiles This can be done using various similarity measures and algorithms.
Items with high similarity scores to the user's profile are then recommended to the user.
Personalization: Recommends items based on specific user preferences, potentially discovering new and diverse music.
Scalability: Works well with limited user data, making it suitable for smaller platforms.
Cold start problem: Can recommend items to new users with little listening history.
Data dependency: Relies heavily on accurate and comprehensive item attributes, which can be costly and time-consuming to maintain.
Limited scope: May struggle to recommend items outside the user's existing preferences, leading to filter bubbles.
Ignoring user context: Doesn't take into account factors like time, location, or activity, potentially offering irrelevant recommendations.
+) Applications used Content-Based Filtering: Spotify, Pandora, Last.fm, YouTube Music
Overall, CBF is a valuable technique for music recommendation systems, offering personalized and diverse recommendations However, its limitations highlight the need for combining it with other approaches like collaborative filtering to create a more robust and context-aware recommender system.
Collaborative Filtering (CF) is a cornerstone technique in recommender systems, playing a key role in tailoring recommendations to individual users’ preferences. Unlike Content-Based Filtering which focuses on item attributes, CF leverages the collective wisdom of the crowd to suggest items based on similar user behavior Here's an overview of how CF works:
Building User Profiles: e CF relies on user interaction data, such as listening history, ratings, and purchases Based on this data, individual user profiles are built, capturing their preferences and tendencies. e Identifying Similar Users: e The system analyzes user profiles and identifies other users with similar behavior patterns This can be done using various similarity measures and clustering algorithms.
Predicting Preferences: e For each user, the system predicts their preference for items they haven't interacted with yet based on the recommendations enjoyed by similar users.
Recommending Items: e Items with high predicted preference scores are then recommended to the user This opens up avenues for discovering new favorites and exploring diverse genres.
Types of Collaborative Filtering: e User-based CF: Focuses on finding similar users and recommending items they like that the target user hasn't tried. e Item-based CF: Focuses on finding similar items to those the user has enjoyed and recommending them.
Strengths of CF: e Personalization: Captures complex user preferences beyond genre and attributes, leading to highly relevant recommendations.
2.3.3 e Serendipity: Introduces users to new and unexpected options they might not have discovered themselves. e Cold start problem: Can provide recommendations even with limited user data, unlike CBF.
Weaknesses of CF: e Data sparsity: Requires a large and active user base for accurate predictions, potentially hindering performance for smaller platforms. e Scalability: Computationally expensive, especially for large datasets. e Echo chambers: May reinforce existing preferences and limit exposure to diverse content, leading to filter bubbles.
+) Applications used Content-Based Filtering: Spotify, Last.fm, YouTube Music
Overall, CF is a powerful technique for generating personalized and serendipitous recommendations However, its data-driven nature and potential for filter bubbles highlight the need for combining it with other approaches like CBF and hybrid filtering for a more robust and diverse recommendation experience.
Hybrid filtering emerges as a powerful solution in music recommendation systems, seeking to overcome the limitations of both content-based filtering (CBF) and collaborative filtering (CF) by synergistically combining their strengths It essentially creates a "best of both worlds" approach, leading to more personalized, diverse, and accurate recommendations Here's an overview of how hybrid filtering works:
Leveraging Two Worlds: e Content-based: Analyzes song attributes like genre, tempo, and mood to build profiles and identify similarities. e Collaborative: Examines user interaction data like listening history and ratings to identify similar users and predict preferences.
These two layers of information are integrated using various techniques like: e Weighted Averaging: Assigns different weights to CBF and CF recommendations based on the system's confidence or user preferences. e Cascading Filtering: Uses CBF for initial recommendations and then refines them using CF based on similar user preferences.
17 e Collaborative-Content Filtering: Integrates content features into the CF model during user similarity calculation.
Hybrid filtering offers: e Personalized: Combines user-specific tastes from CF with item-specific features from CBF for fine-tuned recommendations. e Serendipitous: Introduces diverse items from CBF beyond the confines of similar user preferences, preventing filter bubbles. e Cold Start Problem Reduction: Can recommend for new users or items with limited data by leveraging the strengths of both approaches.
Popular Hybrid Filtering Techniques: e Weighted Hybrid Model: Assigns weights to CBF and CF recommendations based on their predicted accuracy or user preferences. e Feature Fusion Model: Integrates content features like genre and mood into the CF model for user similarity calculation. e Hybrid Recommender Network: Uses machine learning techniques to combine CBF and CF representations in a neural network to predict user preferences.
Advantages of Hybrid Filtering: e Improved personalization and accuracy: Combines the strengths of individual approaches for more relevant and effective recommendations. e Enhances exploration and serendipity: Introduces diverse items beyond user preferences while maintaining personalization. e Reduced cold start problem: Provides recommendations for new users or items with limited data.
Challenges of Hybrid Filtering: e Increased complexity: Combining models requires careful design and calibration to avoid overfitting or underfitting. e Data management: Requires effective integration and cleansing of diverse data sources from both CBF and CF perspectives. e Tuning and optimization: Needs continuous monitoring and adjustments to maintain optimal performance for personalized recommendations.
*Applications used Content-Based Filtering: Spotify, Amazon Music, Apple Music
Overall, hybrid filtering proves to be a game-changer in music recommendation systems by bridging the gap between user preferences and item characteristics Its ability to offer personalized, diverse, and accurate recommendations makes it a powerful tool for enhancing user engagement and satisfaction.
Specific Challenges of Music Recommendation
From a computational perspective, some of the tasks listed in Table 1 seem quite similar to recommendation tasks in other domains, like e-commerce The personalized and non- contextualized recommendation scenarios can in principle be addressed with collaborative filtering approaches that are designed for relevance prediction and learning- to-rank scenarios, where the final goal is to create a ranked list of objects that are supposed to be generally relevant for a user We will discuss a variant of such a standard collaborative filtering technique, as used by Spotify, later in Section 2 Similarly, the problem of providing a virtually endless playlist given the user’s recently played tracks can be found in a comparable form as a session-based recommendation scenario in e- commerce Hidasi et al (2016a); We will discuss the specifics of the problem setting for music recommendation in a later section as well.
Table 1: Examples of Music Recommendation Tasks.
Trending List: Provide a list of currently trending (or currently being played) items, e.g., tracks, albums, artists, concerts etc.
Often used as a baseline for experiments in the research literature, e.g.
Similar Objects: Find similar tracks or artists, available, e.g., on Spotify This type of recommendation can often be found in the Music Information Curated Playlists: Help users discover things through curated (editorial) playlists, e.g., on
Broadcasting Radios: Usually made by professional disc jockeys Such playlists often contain popular tracks and are often targeting specific audiences.
Track, Artist Discovery: Help users to find something new that matches their general preferences, as implemented, e.g., by Spotify in the “Discover Weekly” and “Release Radar”. Album Discovery: Recommend albums to listen to Such a functionality can be found on general e-commerce sites like Ama- zon.com as well.
Enjoyment Prediction: Provide an assessment if the user will like a certain track, artist or album; also, create a list of things that the user will presumably not like.
Generate a personalized playlist based on user tastes; like
Personalized Recommendation of Curated Playlists: Suggest hand-made playlists to users that are likely to generally match their taste, e.g., on Deezer.
Rarely studied in the literature, see.
Recommendation of Radio Streams Recommend broadcasting radio stations to users based on their profile and feedback Also rarely studied, see.
20 e Virtual Radio Station: Create e Personalized Radio (next-track a virtu- ally endless playlist, recommendation): Generate a given a seed track or seed virtually endless radio based on artist To be found on Spotify, the last played tracks, while
Deezer, Pandora, and other possibly considering the user popular ser- vices, as well as in immediate feedback (e.g., “like”, the research literature, see “skip”, and “ban” actions). e Playlist Construction Support: e Personalized Playlist
Generate a playlist based on seed Construction Support: Generate tracks or other information a playlist based on seed tracks or regarding the current session, other information, like the user’s like the user’s mood; or provide mood and past preferences. suggestions of tracks during manual playlist creation.
Contextualized Playlist Recommendation: Recommend a curated playlist based, e.g., on the time of the day, day of the week,3or season.
Several aspects are however very specific to music recommendation, and some others are at least more relevant for music than for other application areas of recommender systems These aspects relate both to technical and non-technical issues and include, among others, the following Catalog aspects: While larger e-commerce shops can easily have hundred thousand of catalog items, the number of recommendable items on Spotify, as of 2018, is over 35 million tracks This can make the application of academic approaches challenging Furthermore, constantly new tracks are released and added to the catalog And, at least for some musical genres, the freshness or recency of the recommendations might be an important quality factor to consider Moreover, the meta- data of the tracks in the catalog can be very noisy and incomplete, and significant efforts might be required in order to clean it and infer missing information, in particular.
Preference information: Users of the Ringo system was asked to indicate their preferences for 125 artists (popular ones and random ones) While also some of today’s systems (such as Microsoft Groove) ask users to provide an initial set of preferences regarding artists and genres, music recommenders often must rely on mostly implicit preference signals in terms of listening logs, sometimes in combination with explicit like
21 statements or “skip” actions Besides the problem of correctly interpreting very large amounts of implicit feedback, an additional challenge in that context is that preferences can change over time.
Repeated recommendations: Many recommendation algorithms, and particularly those that are based on the matrix completion problem abstraction, aim to predict the relevance of unseen items In the music domain, repeatedly listening to the same tracks is however common If such repeated consumptions should be supported, algorithmic approaches must be able both to decide which tracks to recommend repeatedly and when to recommend these tracks.
Immediate consumption and feedback: Differently from many e-commerce domains, the recommendations provided on a music streaming service can be immediately
“consumed” by the listeners, e.g., using a personalized radio station A main challenge in that context is that the system should be able to provide the user with a means to “correct” recommendations or give feedback (e.g., in terms of a like or dislike button) Moreover, this feedback should be immediately considered in the recommendation process.
Mainstream might not be enough: In some sense, music is “more niche” than movies Johnson (2014) While in movie recommendation there are many blockbusters that are safe to recommend to a major fraction of the users, there are many musical genres which have their specific audiences (like jazz, classical music, or pop), and recommending generally popular items might easily lead to a bad user experience.
Context-dependence and time variance: Which music we want to listen to can be highly context- dependent The relevant contextual factors can include, for example, the user’s mood, the time of the day, or if the user listens to the music alone or as part of a group Being able to capture and consider these contextual factors can be crucial for the quality perception and acceptance of a recommender.
Purposes of music listening: One related specificity of music is the fact that one often listens to music with a very specific purpose in mind: create a particular ambiance for a party, getting some motivation to wash the dishes, enhance the experience of reading a good book, getting relaxed before going to bed, etc This means that the recommended items not only have to fit the current context, but also fit the purpose of the user.
Musical taste and stated preferences can be socially influenced: Which music we like and listen to is not only affected by our own mood, but it can also be substantially affected by our social environment (“social bonding’) and/or trends in the community as a whole.For some scenarios it can therefore be particularly helpful to consider a user’s social environment and corresponding behavior in the past in the recommendation process At the same time, when users share their tastes and preferences on social networks, it is not always clear if people listen to what they publicly “like” or if they merely use their public profiles to create a desired image of themselves.
Current situation of Music Recommendation system
Machine Learning and Deep Learning:
Music streaming platforms employ machine learning algorithms, including deep learning techniques, to analyze user behavior, preferences, and patterns These algorithms go beyond simple collaborative filtering, taking into account factors such as user history, context (time of day, location), and implicit feedback to provide more personalized recommendations.
Content-based recommendation systems focus on analyzing the intrinsic features of songs, such as genre, tempo, mood, and instrumentation Combining content-based and collaborative filtering approaches helps in delivering more accurate and diverse recommendations.
Many platforms are exploring ways to enhance user engagement by incorporating interactive elements into their recommendation systems This includes features like user feedback loops, allowing users to provide explicit feedback on suggested songs and influencing subsequent recommendations.
Music recommendation systems are incorporating external data sources, such as social media activity, to gain additional insights into user preferences Integrating data
23 from platforms like Music or Spotify can provide a more comprehensive understanding of a user's musical taste and social connections.
With the increasing popularity of voice-activated virtual assistants and smart speakers, music recommendation systems are adapting to these platforms Users can now use voice commands to discover new music or create playlists, and recommendation systems are optimizing their algorithms for such interactions.
Some research is focusing on cross-modal recommendation systems, which recommend music based on other modalities such as images or text For example, a user might receive music recommendations based on the content of a related image or a textual description.
There is a growing awareness of ethical considerations and user privacy in recommendation systems Platforms are working to ensure transparency and provide users with control over their data, allowing them to understand how their information is used for personalized recommendations.
Methods Of Algorithm Implemenfation
Conclusion from the reSuẽ( - - 5 55255 + *+2*‡+ʇ+ev++evxseseeessxss 43
After applying both methods to our system and producing results, we have a few observations as follows: e Collaborative Filtering is more effective in recommending new and diverse songs to users CBF can only recommend songs that are similar to songs the user has heard before CF, on the other hand, can recommend songs based on the user's preferences, even if the user has not heard those songs before This is because CF relies on user interaction data with other songs, such as likes, shares, and listening history. e Collaborative Filtering is more effective in overcoming the "cold start" problem.
CBF requests data about songs to build a profile for each song This can be difficult for new songs or songs that haven't been widely released yet CF, on the other hand, can recommend songs based on user interaction data with other songs This
43 makes CF more effective at recommending songs to new users or users with little engagement data. e Collaborative Filtering is more effective in explaining recommendations It can be difficult for CBF to explain to users why a particular song is recommended CF, on the other hand, can interpret recommendations based on user preferences This can help users trust recommendations more and be more likely to engage with them Collaborative Filtering is more effective in explaining recommendations It can be difficult for CBF to explain to users why a particular song is recommended.
CF, on the other hand, can interpret recommendations based on user preferences. This can help users trust recommendations more and be more likely to engage with them is more effective in explaining recommendations It can be difficult for CBF to explain to users why a particular song is recommended CF, on the other hand, can interpret recommendations based on user preferences This can help users trust recommendations more and be more likely to engage with them.
After reaching a conclusion, we proceed to analyze the mapping of the music recommendation system based on the prepared data:
MAP=NIS)=lNAP¡ where: e Nis the total number of users. e APi 1s the average precision for user i. © map score = calculate_map(actual data, recommended_data) print("MAP Score:", map score)
The result of this code is a MAP score of 0.7083333333333334 This means the song recommendation system has an average accuracy of 70.83%.
Analysis and Design The Applicafion ô.-s- sôô<ô 45 h9
ERD Diagraim -. 5 6 xà kh TH HT HH 48
An Entity-Relationship model describes inter-related things of interest in a specific domain of knowledge In software development, ER model has become an abstract data model that defines a data/information structure that can be implemented in a database, typically a relational database In our database, we have separate tables for user, music, recommendation, and session Each table has several attributes that best describe the table To get required information, say we need to print details of particular user, we need to access database and more than one tables to retrieve data We need certain relationship between each tables in our database and a common attribute to map tuples of one table to another ER Diagram provides visual reference to complete database at one glance We can develop database looking at the ER Diagram and later use it as reference for further improvement.
The ER diagram depicting the entities used in the system and relationship between them is given below: The entities in the system are:
Figure 3.12: ER diagram of the System
1 Session: It consists of attributes: session id and user id and has one to one relationshipwith user.
2 Music: It consists of attributes: artist and song title and also has many to many relationships with the user-music and recommendation.
3 User: It consists of attributes user id, name and personality traits attributes and has many to many relationships with user-music and one to one with the session with session and recommendation.
4 Recommendation: It consists of attributes user and music and has one to one relation-ship with user while many to many relationships with music.
5 User-Music: It consists of attributes user, music and rating and many to many relation-ship with user and music.
System is implemented within the Django framework that provides a abstraction to the relationship within the database hence we can directly implement those relationship within the database such as one-to-one, one-to-many and many-to- many.
Sequence Diagram nan Ả
Sequence Diagram describes the dynamic aspects of the system It diagram shows user oriented view of system operation We have made activity diagram using swim- lanes A swim lane is a visual element that distinguishes job sharing and responsibilities for sub- processes In our system’s activity diagram, we have three swim-lanes and we have separated job/responsibilities accordingly Each step is continuation of previous step Decision is taken wherever necessary, and fork and join is used to divide or attach work flow The objective of making activity diagram is similar to objectives of other UML Diagrams Only difference is that it is used to show message flow between activities.
HO QOONNANAg@gggẠ Select a Song-~ -~-~ ~=~~ 2 beeen eee e eee eee eee Song Query.-= peeneereereeerreeee ‘Control music: Next, Pause a“
Figure 3.13 Sequence Diagram of the System The diagram shows the steps a user takes to play a song on a music app First, the user searches for a song The music app then queries its database to find the song data Once the song data is found, the user selects the song they want to listen to The music app then sends a request to the source to play the song The source queries its database to find the song data and then transfers the data to the music app The music app then plays the song for the user.
Achievement Through this course we learned to use methods and algorithms in a musical recommendation system and analyze their results From this we have come to the following conclusions about the benefits of the music recommendation system:
For users, these systems act as a digital compass, navigating the vast sonic landscape and unearthing hidden gems tailored to their unique tastes Whether seeking familiar comfort or exhilarating exploration, recommendations guide us towards artists we might have missed, genres we haven't explored, and songs that perfectly capture our mood This personalized touch fosters a deeper connection with music, transforming passive listeners into active discoverers.
For music platforms, recommendation systems are lifeblood They boost user engagement, keeping us captivated and returning for more By understanding our preferences and anticipating our desires, they cultivate a sense of loyalty and satisfaction This translates to increased streaming hours, ad revenue, and ultimately, a thriving platform ecosystem.
The impact extends beyond individual platforms These systems act as data oracles, offering invaluable insights into listener trends and musical preferences This knowledge empowers artists to target their music effectively, labels to identify promising talent, and even music festivals to curate captivating lineups Ultimately, it fuels a more vibrant and responsive music industry, one that's in tune with its audience.
The future of music recommendation isn't just about algorithms and data It's about striking a harmonious balance between technological prowess and human intuition.
As these systems evolve, they must retain their ability to surprise and delight, to introduce us to music that resonates not just with our data profiles, but with our hearts
COnCẽUSỈOTN 0- << 5< < S9 994 9996 9998995895985898589968856866 5 S0 na
Challenges Q.1 1211 H1 1111111 1 1n nh Thun ngàng 52
In addition to the above achievements, there are also difficulties we need to overcome in the process of building a system of musical recommendations
Data sparsity is an inherent property of user preference datasets since users only rate the items they have accessed or purchased Those commercial systems with a relative large number of users and items have the problem of low coverage of the users’ ratings among the items It 1s common to have a sparse user-item matrix of 1% (or less) coverage. The lack of access to the content of the items prevents similar users from being matched unless they have rated the exact same items Thus, the sparsity of dataset prohibits effective recommendations Only the items that were actually rated by users can be addressed and only strong patterns in communities are actually propagated If two similar items have never been rated by the same user, those two items cannot be classified into the same community, not necessarily because they are inherently unassociated but because their associations have not been observed among the users For recommendation systems that rely on comparing users in pairs and therefore generating predictions, data sparsity poses challenges to neighbor transitivity If user A and B have similar interests, and user C shares similar interests with B, it is not necessarily true that user A and C are like-minded as they may have rated too few items.
To alleviate the data sparsity problem, many approaches have been proposed, including Singular Value Decomposition (SVD), Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) Generally, model-based CF algorithms can tackle the sparsity problem better than memory-based CF algorithms First, it is easier to capture the similarities between users and items in a reduced dimensional space than in a sparse high-dimensional space Second, model-based algorithms can provide more accurate predictions for sparse data than memory-based ones.
Collaborative filtering is prone to popularity bias as expected by its inherent social component It “tends to reinforce popular artists, at the expense of discarding less-known music” The popularity of music can be measured in terms of total play counts or the fraction of total consumption fulfilled In a user preference dataset, popular items seem to be similar to (or related with) lots of items, such that they are more likely to be recommended As a consequence, the recommenders are sometimes biased towards a small number of popular items and do not explore the Long Tail of unknown items that could be more interesting and novel for the users Navigation through the network of popular artists reveals a poor discovery ratio And this can decrease user satisfaction and novelty detection in the recommendation workflow; On the other hand, content-based and human expert-based recommendation systems are un vulnerable to the popularity bias One possible way to recommend long tail items using conventional collaborative filtering, is to identify a candidate pool of long tail items from which to draw recommendations.
The cold start problem is related to both elements of a recommendation system: users and items It occurs when a new user or item has just entered the system, which is also called new user/item problem or early rater problem It is difficult to find similar users or items because there is not enough information Collaborative filtering cannot recommend a new item until some users rate it, for there are no user ratings on which to base the predictions Moreover, early recommendations for the item will often be inaccurate because there are few ratings on it Similarly, new users are unlikely to receive good recommendations because of the lack of their ratings or purchase histories The cold start problem essentially restricts the performance of a collaborative filtering system.
Since collaborative filtering relies on social information to receive recommendations, good ratings seem to promise a good selling rate To manipulate the recommendation, producers or malicious users may introduce fake user profiles that highly rate a set of target items, and then give negative ratings to other items The desired result is known as
53 a shilling attack, which consists of either increasing rating (push attack) or lowering rating (nuke attack) These attacks can affect the quality of the recommendation and result in decreasing satisfaction with the system Lam and Riedl found that item-based CF algorithms were much less affected by the attacks than the user-based CF algorithms. Attack models for shilling the item-based CF systems have been examined in Mobasher et al Future systems need to introduce precautions that discourage this phenomenon.
The future of music recommendation systems on music websites promises a symphony of innovation, driven by a focus on deeper personalization, serendipitous discovery, and seamless integration with user context Imagine systems that transcend genre and artist constraints, instead delving into the emotional nuances of music to match a user's mood or activity Al-powered lyric analysis and audio feature extraction could unlock hidden connections between songs, leading users down unexpected but delightful auditory paths Additionally, incorporating real-time context like location, weather, and even social media trends could curate playlists that dynamically adapt to a user's ever- evolving environment By embracing cutting-edge technology and prioritizing user needs, music recommendation systems will not just suggest songs, they will orchestrate personalized soundtracks for life's every moment.
[1] Tiemann, M., S Pauws, and F Vignoli 2007 Ensemble learning for hybrid music rec- ommendation In S Dixon, D Bainbridge, and R Typke (Eds.), Proceedings of In- ternational Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference
[2] Yoshii, K., M Goto, K Komatani, T Ogata, and H G Okuno 2008 An efficient hybrid music recommender system using an incrementally trainable probabilistic generative model IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech &
[3] Shardanand, U 1994 Social information filtering for music recommendation Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[4] Shardanand, U., and P Maes 1995 Social information filtering:
Algorithms for automat- ing “word of mouth” In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
[5] Magno, T., and C Sable 2008 A comparison of signal based music recommendation to genre labels, collaborative filtering, musicological analysis, human recommendation and random baseline In Proceedings of International Society for Music
[6] Eck, G Desjardins, and P Lamere 2009 Steerable playlist generation by learning song similarity from radio station playlists.
In Proceedings of International Society for Music Information
[7] Celma, M Koppenberger, P Cano, and J M Buldu 2007 The social network of contemporary popular musicians /nternational
Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos
[8] Hidasi, B and Karatzoglou, A (2017) Recurrent Neural Networks with Top-k Gains for Session-based Recommendations, CoRR abs/1706.03847.
[9] Hidasi, B., Karatzoglou, A., Baltrunas, L., and Tikk, D (2016a).
Session-based Recommendations with Recurrent Neural Networks, in
[10] Hidasi, B., Quadrana, M., Karatzoglou, A., and Tikk, D.
(2016b) Parallel Recurrent Neural Network Architectures for Feature- rich Session-based Recommendations, in RecSys ’16