In this task, you are given a part of an article. Your task is to generate headline (title) for this text. Preferred headlines are under fifteen words.

Q: We show that collaborative filtering can be viewed as a sequence prediction problem, and that given this interpretation, recurrent neural networks offer very competitive approach. In particular we study how the long short-term memory (LSTM) can be applied to collaborative filtering, and how it compares to standard nearest neighbors and matrix factorization methods on movie recommendation. We show that the LSTM is competitive in all aspects, and largely outperforms other methods in terms of item coverage and short term predictions.

A: Collaborative Filtering with Recurrent Neural Networks
****
Q: We consider a general framework of online learning with expert advice where the regret is defined with respect to a competitor class defined by a weighted automaton over sequences of experts. Our framework covers several problems previously studied, in particular that of competing against k-shifting experts. We give a series of algorithms for this problem, including an automata-based algorithm extending weightedmajority and more efficient algorithms based on the notion of failure transitions. We further present efficient algorithms based on a compact approximation of the competitor automaton, in particular efficient n-gram models obtained by minimizing the Renyi divergence, and present an extensive study of the approximation properties of such models. We also extend our algorithms and results to the framework of sleeping experts. Finally, we describe the extension of our approximation methods to online convex optimization and a general mirror descent setting.

A: Online Learning against Expert Automata
****
Q: In the last five years there have been a large number of new time series classification algorithms proposed in the literature. These algorithms have been evaluated on subsets of the 47 data sets in the University of California, Riverside time series classification archive. The archive has recently been expanded to 85 data sets, over half of which have been donated by researchers at the University of East Anglia. Aspects of previous evaluations have made comparisons between algorithms difficult. For example, several different programming languages have been used, experiments involved a single train/test split and some used normalised data whilst others did not. The relaunch of the archive provides a timely opportunity to thoroughly evaluate algorithms on a larger number of datasets. We have implemented 18 recently proposed algorithms in a common Java framework and compared them against two standard benchmark classifiers (and each other) by performing 100 resampling experiments on each of the 85 datasets. We use these results to test several hypotheses relating to whether the algorithms are significantly more accurate than the benchmarks and each other. Our results indicate that only 9 of these algorithms are significantly more accurate than both benchmarks and that one classifier, the Collective of Transformation Ensembles, is significantly more accurate than all of the others. All of our experiments and results are reproducible: we release all of our code, results and experimental details and we hope these experiments form the basis for more rigorous testing of new algorithms in the future.

A:
The Great Time Series Classification Bake Off: An Experimental Evaluation of Recently Proposed Algorithms. Extended Version
****