Thank you so much guys for discussing the problem of mine. I am getting the
recommendations now!
You mentioned something about improving the performance in one of the mails.

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Thomas Rewig <[email protected]> wrote:

> In principle your code works (I tested it), I just think your Testdata
> isn't good or so realistic because it is not much and worse distributed - if
> you delete all 0.1 Items - ... but that is only my assumption.
>
> If you need some working testdata you can use that data I used as I started
> with taste and want to know how it works:
>
> User1,Item1,5
> User1,Item2,4
> User1,Item4,2
> User2,Item2,3
> User2,Item3,2
> User3,Item2,4
> User3,Item3,3
> User3,Item4,2
> User4,Item1,1
> User4,Item2,1
> User4,Item3,1
> User4,Item4,1
>
> You can compute it (For User 1-3 there is a recommendation, for User 4
> naturaly not because all Items are set)
> and than you can calculate the stuff manually or debug it and understand
> like taste is working.
>
> Perhaps this helps you a little bit.
>
> regards
> Thomas
>
> Laya Patwa schrieb:
>
>  OK... but i am getting recommendations for this data file!
>> And i also tried the other data file after removing some of the items but
>> the recommendation list is still empty. Can you please have a look at it
>> that you have the code and the data now.
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I have them now. Yes, again Thomas's analysis is correct about why
>>> there are no recommendations from the .txt file. See the previous
>>> messages about what to do.
>>>
>>> The other data file has a different issue. All the ratings are the
>>> same. Correlation-based similarity metrics will not work as they
>>> cannot define a similarity in such a case (correlation is undefined).
>>> It will be unable to give recommendations as a result. You need to try
>>> a different metric like TanimotoCoefficientSimilarity.
>>>
>>> If that works well, there is a way to make this a lot faster. We can
>>> discuss it next.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Laya Patwa<[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> There is a problem in the mailing system I guess. I am sending 1 file in
>>>>
>>>>
>>> 1
>>>
>>>
>>>> mail. This has the code file.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There is still only one text file attached. But anyway I believe Thomas
>>>>> has
>>>>> identified the problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 15, 2009 1:03 PM, "Laya Patwa" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> You did not get the code? But I sent it. Anyways please find 3 files
>>>>> attached with this mail containing the code and the 2 data files.
>>>>> My apologies for the mistake.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: >
>>>>>        Thomas is right, you have...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to