RALLRec+: Retrieval Augmented Large Language Model Recommendation with Reasoning

March 26, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Expert systems with applications

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

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Sichun Luo, Jian Xu, Xiaojie Zhang, Linrong Wang, Sicong Liu, Hanxu Hou, Linqi Song arXiv ID 2503.20430 Category cs.IR: Information Retrieval Citations 4 Venue Expert systems with applications Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been integrated into recommender systems to enhance user behavior comprehension. The Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) technique is further incorporated into these systems to retrieve more relevant items and improve system performance. However, existing RAG methods have two shortcomings. \textit{(i)} In the \textit{retrieval} stage, they rely primarily on textual semantics and often fail to incorporate the most relevant items, thus constraining system effectiveness. \textit{(ii)} In the \textit{generation} stage, they lack explicit chain-of-thought reasoning, further limiting their potential. In this paper, we propose Representation learning and \textbf{R}easoning empowered retrieval-\textbf{A}ugmented \textbf{L}arge \textbf{L}anguage model \textbf{Rec}ommendation (RALLRec+). Specifically, for the retrieval stage, we prompt LLMs to generate detailed item descriptions and perform joint representation learning, combining textual and collaborative signals extracted from the LLM and recommendation models, respectively. To account for the time-varying nature of user interests, we propose a simple yet effective reranking method to capture preference dynamics. For the generation phase, we first evaluate reasoning LLMs on recommendation tasks, uncovering valuable insights. Then we introduce knowledge-injected prompting and consistency-based merging approach to integrate reasoning LLMs with general-purpose LLMs, enhancing overall performance. Extensive experiments on three real world datasets validate our method's effectiveness.
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