Explainable recommendation has shown its great advantages for improving recommendation persuasiveness, user satisfaction, system transparency, among others. A fundamental problem of explainable recommendation is how to evaluate the explanations. In the past few years, various evaluation strategies have been proposed. However, they are scattered in different papers, and there lacks a systematic and detailed comparison between them. To bridge this gap, in this paper, we comprehensively review the previous work, and provide different taxonomies for them according to the evaluation perspectives and evaluation methods. Beyond summarizing the previous work, we also analyze the (dis)advantages of existing evaluation methods and provide a series of guidelines on how to select them. The contents of this survey are based on more than 100 papers from top-tier conferences like IJCAI, AAAI, TheWebConf, Recsys, UMAP, and IUI, and their complete summarization are presented at https://shimo.im/sheets/VKrpYTcwVH6KXgdy/MODOC/. With this survey, we finally aim to provide a clear and comprehensive review on the evaluation of explainable recommendation.
翻译:为了弥补这一差距,我们在本文件中全面审查了以前的工作,并根据评价观点和评价方法为它们提供不同的分类。除了总结以前的工作外,我们还分析现有评价方法的(缺点),并就如何选择这些方法提供一系列准则。本调查的内容以来自国际司法学会、阿拉伯投资学会、TheWebConf、Recsys、UMAP和IUI等最高级会议的100多份文件为基础,我们最后的目标是对可解释建议的评价进行清楚和全面的审查。