Ok, please file a bug report detailing what you've tested and what results
you got.

Just to clarify, setting maxPrefsPerUser to a high number still does not
help? That surprises me.


2013/8/1 Rafal Lukawiecki <[email protected]>

> Hi Sebastian,
>
> I've rechecked the results, and, I'm afraid that the issue has not gone
> away, contrary to my yesterday's enthusiastic response. Using 0.8 I have
> retested with and without --maxPrefsPerUser 9000 parameter (no user has
> more than 5000 prefs). I have also supplied the prefs file, without the
> preference value, that is as: user,item (one per line) as a --filterFile,
> with and without the -maxPrefsPerUser, and I am afraid we are also seeing
> recommendations for items the user has expressed a prior preference for.
>
> I suppose I need to file a bug report.
>
> Rafal
> --
> Rafal Lukawiecki
> Pardon my brevity, sent from a telephone.
>
> On 31 Jul 2013, at 22:35, "Rafal Lukawiecki" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Sebastian,
> >
> > It looks like setting --maxPrefsPerUser 10000 have resolved the issue in
> our case—it seems that the most preferences a user had was just about 5000,
> so I doubled it just-in-case, but when I operationalise this model, I will
> make sure to calculate the actual max number of preferences and set the
> parameter accordingly. I will double-check the resultset to make sure the
> issue is really gone, as I have only checked the few cases where we have
> spotted a recommendation of a previously preferred item.
> >
> > Would you like me to file a bug, and would you like me to test it on 0.8
> or another version? I am using 0.7.
> >
> > Thanks for your kind support.
> > Rafal
> > --
> > Rafal Lukawiecki
> > Strategic Consultant and Director
> > Project Botticelli Ltd
> >
> > On 31 Jul 2013, at 06:22, Sebastian Schelter <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rafal,
> >
> > can you try to set the option --maxPrefsPerUser to the maximum number of
> > interactions per user and see if you still get the error?
> >
> > Best,
> > Sebastian
> >
> > On 30.07.2013 19:29, Rafal Lukawiecki wrote:
> >> Thank you Sebastian. The data set is not that large, as we are running
> tests on a subset. It is about 24k users, 40k items, the preference file
> has 65k preferences as triples. This was using Similarity Cooccurrence.
> >>
> >> I can see if I could anonymise the data set to share if that would be
> helpful.
> >>
> >> Thanks for your kind help.
> >>
> >> Rafal
> >> --
> >> Rafal Lukawiecki
> >> Pardon my brevity, sent from a telephone.
> >>
> >> On 30 Jul 2013, at 18:18, "Sebastian Schelter" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Rafal,
> >>>
> >>> can you issue a ticket for this problem at
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT ? We have unit-tests that
> >>> check whether this happens and currently they work fine. I can only
> imagine
> >>> that the problem occurs in larger datasets where we sample the data in
> some
> >>> places. Can you describe a scenario/dataset where this happens?
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Sebastian
> >>>
> >>> 2013/7/30 Rafal Lukawiecki <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>>> I'm new here, just registered. Many thanks to everyone for working on
> an
> >>>> amazing piece of software, thank you for building Mahout and for your
> >>>> support. My apologies if this is not the right place to ask the
> question—I
> >>>> have searched for the issue, and I can see this problem has been
> reported
> >>>> here:
> >>>>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13822455/apache-mahout-distributed-recommender-recommends-already-rated-items
> >>>>
> >>>> Unfortunately, the trail leads to the newsgroups, and I have not
> found a
> >>>> way, yet, to get an answer from them, without asking you.
> >>>>
> >>>> Essentially, I am running a Hadoop RecommenderJob from Mahout 0.7,
> and I
> >>>> am finding that it is recommending items that the user has already
> >>>> expressed a preference for in their input file. I understand that this
> >>>> should not be happening, and I am not sure if there is a know fix or
> if I
> >>>> should be looking for a workaround (such as using the entire input as
> the
> >>>> filterFile).
> >>>>
> >>>> I will double-check that there is no error on my side, but so far it
> does
> >>>> not seem that way.
> >>>>
> >>>> Many thanks and my regards from Ireland,
> >>>> Rafal Lukawiecki
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>> Rafal Lukawiecki
> >>>>
> >>>> Strategic Consultant and Director
> >>>>
> >>>> Project Botticelli Ltd
> >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to