Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2504.05314

Multimodal Quantitative Language for Generative Recommendation

Abstract

Generative recommendation has emerged as a promising paradigm aiming at directly generating the identifiers of the target candidates. Most existing methods attempt to leverage prior knowledge embedded in Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) to improve the recommendation performance. However, they often fail to accommodate the differences between the general linguistic knowledge of PLMs and the specific needs of recommendation systems. Moreover, they rarely consider the complementary knowledge between the multimodal information of items, which represents the multi-faceted preferences of users. To facilitate efficient recommendation knowledge transfer, we propose a novel approach called Multimodal Quantitative Language for Generative Recommendation (MQL4GRec). Our key idea is to transform items from different domains and modalities into a unified language, which can serve as a bridge for transferring recommendation knowledge. Specifically, we first introduce quantitative translators to convert the text and image content of items from various domains into a new and concise language, known as quantitative language, with all items sharing the same vocabulary. Then, we design a series of quantitative language generation tasks to enrich quantitative language with semantic information and prior knowledge. Finally, we achieve the transfer of recommendation knowledge from different domains and modalities to the recommendation task through pre-training and fine-tuning. We evaluate the effectiveness of MQL4GRec through extensive experiments and comparisons with existing methods, achieving improvements over the baseline by 11.18\%, 14.82\%, and 7.95\% on the NDCG metric across three different datasets, respectively.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jianyang Zhai, Zi-Feng Mai, Chang-Dong Wang, Feidiao Yang, Xiawu Zheng, Hui Li, Yonghong Tian. 2025-02-20. Multimodal Quantitative Language for Generative Recommendation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.05314

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

WebArxiv: A Reproducible Benchmark for Evaluating Multimodal Web Agents on arXiv Tasks

Foundation models now enable autonomous agents to interact with real-world websites, but existing benchmarks emphasize general-purpose browsing, underrepresent research-oriented environments and scholarly discovery workflows, and often depend on live sites whose changing content and structure undermine reproducibility. arXiv provides a realistic, reproducible, hierarchically structured, information-centric testbed without privacy-sensitive interactions. We introduce WebArxiv, a static-snapshot benchmark comprising 510 time-invariant tasks, each with a unique deterministic ground truth. Its diverse, realistic scholarly tasks go beyond simple information lookup and rule following to emphasize multi-constraint paper retrieval, fine-grained content extraction, and cross-paper comparison. Evaluations of a range of foundation-model-based web agents show that WebArxiv remains challenging. Behavioral analysis reveals that agents over-rely on fixed interaction histories, causing incomplete or repetitive reasoning. We therefore equip agents with a lightweight dynamic-memory mechanism for adaptive retrieval and reasoning over relevant context. The benchmark and code are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/74E4423BVNW/README.md.

cs.IR

GreekBarRetrieval: A Benchmark for Greek Statutory Retrieval

Statutory retrieval is necessary for citation-grounded legal question answering, but remains underexplored for Greek. We introduce GreekBarRetrieval, a public retrieval benchmark derived from, and complementing GreekBarBench, which did not include retrieval. The new benchmark comprises 283 bar-exam questions, each accompanied by the facts of the case it refers to, and 6,308 candidate statutory articles to retrieve from. Questions and facts are stated in everyday language, but need to be mapped to the formal terminology of statutes and their abstract legal concepts. A further complication is that not all of the case facts are relevant to each question of a case. Experimenting with three BM25 variants and nine dense retrievers, we find that vanilla dense retrieval far outperforms vanilla sparse retrieval in Recall@100. However, LLM-based query reformulation helps BM25 close that gap, while also improving dense retrieval. With a ten-round ReAct-like LLM reformulation loop that we introduce, BM25 improves further in Recall@100 and obtains the best nDCG and MAP scores of all tested retrievers. Query reformulation also outperforms pseudo-relevance feedback, sparse-dense fusion, and English translation.

cs.IR

Parameterized Dense-Sparse Fusion for Hybrid Retrieval: Tuning a Rank-Score Mix on BEIR SciFact with Qdrant

We study a parameterized hybrid ranker that fuses a dense embedding list and a sparse lexical list. The method has a small, explicit parameter vector: a dense prior $α\in [0,1]$, a score-versus-rank mix $λ\in [0,1]$, an RRF smoothing parameter $κ> 0$, optional list-geometry coefficients that move $α$ per query, and a router margin $τ$ that can turn sparse search off. We grid-search those ranges on SciFact train (809 queries) and freeze the chosen values on SciFact test (300). The tuned rank-score mix ($α= 0.8$, $λ= 0.75$, $κ= 20$) reaches 0.753 nDCG@10 and 0.889 recall@10, outperforming dense BGE (0.742 / 0.871) and equal-weight RRF (0.707 nDCG@10) on that test split. A list-conditioned $α$ adds +0.0006 nDCG; a sparse-off router is rejected by the same train split (any $τ$ that skipped approximately 50% of queries lost nDCG). These coefficients are dataset-specific. Equal RRF with the same models does not beat dense on a nine-zip BEIR macro-average (0.479 vs. 0.519 nDCG@10). Repeating the same train-then-freeze sweep independently on all 20 indexed units beats equal RRF on 20/20 and dense on 16/20 (unit-mean nDCG@10 0.467 vs. 0.462 dense vs. 0.420 RRF). Other corpora should reuse the ranges, not a copy of the SciFact point.

cs.IR