Posez n’importe quelle question sur les cours, conférences, exercices, recherches, actualités, etc. de l’EPFL ou essayez les exemples de questions ci-dessous.
AVERTISSEMENT : Le chatbot Graph n'est pas programmé pour fournir des réponses explicites ou catégoriques à vos questions. Il transforme plutôt vos questions en demandes API qui sont distribuées aux différents services informatiques officiellement administrés par l'EPFL. Son but est uniquement de collecter et de recommander des références pertinentes à des contenus que vous pouvez explorer pour vous aider à répondre à vos questions.
Providing explanations for recommended items allows users to refine the recommendations by critiquing parts of the explanations. As a result of revisiting critiquing from the perspective of multimodal generative models, recent work has proposed M&Ms-VAE, which achieves state-of-the-art performance in terms of recommendation, explanation, and critiquing. M&Ms-VAE and similar models allow users to negatively critique (i.e., explicitly disagree). However, they share a significant drawback: users cannot positively critique (i.e., highlight a desired feature). We address this deficiency with M&Ms-VAE+, an extension of M&Ms-VAE that enables positive and negative critiquing. In addition to modeling users' interactions and keyphrase-usage preferences, we model their keyphrase-usage dislikes. Moreover, we design a novel critiquing module that is trained in a self-supervised fashion. Our experiments on two datasets show that M&Ms-VAE+ matches or exceeds M&Ms-VAE in recommendation and explanation performance. Furthermore, our results demonstrate that representing positive and negative critiques differently enables M&Ms-VAE+ to significantly outperform M&Ms-VAE and other models in positive and negative multi-step critiquing.