Pairwise Ranking Loss for Multi-Task Learning in Recommender Systems

June 04, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Furkan Durmus, Hasan Saribas, Said Aldemir, Junyan Yang, Hakan Cevikalp arXiv ID 2406.02163 Category cs.IR: Information Retrieval Citations 4 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Multi-Task Learning (MTL) plays a crucial role in real-world advertising applications such as recommender systems, aiming to achieve robust representations while minimizing resource consumption. MTL endeavors to simultaneously optimize multiple tasks to construct a unified model serving diverse objectives. In online advertising systems, tasks like Click-Through Rate (CTR) and Conversion Rate (CVR) are often treated as MTL problems concurrently. However, it has been overlooked that a conversion ($y_{cvr}=1$) necessitates a preceding click ($y_{ctr}=1$). In other words, while certain CTR tasks are associated with corresponding conversions, others lack such associations. Moreover, the likelihood of noise is significantly higher in CTR tasks where conversions do not occur compared to those where they do, and existing methods lack the ability to differentiate between these two scenarios. In this study, exposure labels corresponding to conversions are regarded as definitive indicators, and a novel task-specific loss is introduced by calculating a \textbf{p}air\textbf{wise} \textbf{r}anking (PWiseR) loss between model predictions, manifesting as pairwise ranking loss, to encourage the model to rely more on them. To demonstrate the effect of the proposed loss function, experiments were conducted on different MTL and Single-Task Learning (STL) models using four distinct public MTL datasets, namely Alibaba FR, NL, US, and CCP, along with a proprietary industrial dataset. The results indicate that our proposed loss function outperforms the BCE loss function in most cases in terms of the AUC metric.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Information Retrieval

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted