aiqbench analysis
This survey critically examines the often-overlooked data processing pipelines in recommender systems, highlighting how preprocessing choices impact model reproducibility and experimental comparability. By establishing a unified taxonomy for feature extraction and splitting protocols across diverse paradigms—from collaborative filtering to LLM-based models—it offers essential guidance for standardizing offline evaluation practices in machine learning research.
Data Processing for Offline Evaluation in Recommender Systems: a Survey
arXiv:2609.31696v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Offline evaluation is the dominant experimental paradigm in recommender systems research, enabling reproducible and cost-effective comparisons on historical interaction data. Yet, while considerable attention has been devoted to recommendation models and evaluation methodologies, the data processing decisions that precede model training have received less scrutiny. These decisions determine the information available to recommendation algorithms and can affect the comparability and reproducibility of experimental results. This survey provides a systematic, cross-domain characterisation of data processing practices for the offline evaluation of recommender systems. We examine the data-centric pipeline, from dataset selection and interaction representation to data preparation, multimodal feature extraction, and train-validation-test splitting. Our analysis spans recommendation paradigms, including collaborative, sequential, session-based, graph-based, knowledge-aware, context-aware, multimodal, federated, cross-domain, contrastive-learning, and LLM-based recommendation. Beyond reviewing existing practices, we introduce a unified framework and taxonomy for describing data transformations and feature-extraction strategies, distinguishing data preparation from the extraction of representations from multimodal side information. Our empirical analysis reveals a landscape dominated by a narrow set of dataset-level transformations, particularly support-driven filtering, while representation-dependent transformations remain less common. We further identify substantial heterogeneity in how auxiliary information is prepared and represented, as well as inconsistencies in the specification of data splitting protocols, where similar labels may conceal different experimental conditions.
Abstract:Offline evaluation is the dominant experimental paradigm in recommender systems research, enabling reproducible and cost-effective comparisons on historical interaction data. Yet, while considerable attention has been devoted to recommendation models and evaluation methodologies, the data processing decisions that precede model training have received less scrutiny. These decisions determine the information available to recommendation algorithms and can affect the comparability and reproducibility of experimental results. This survey provides a systematic, cross-domain characterisation of data processing practices for the offline evaluation of recommender systems. We examine the data-centric pipeline, from dataset selection and interaction representation to data preparation, multimodal feature extraction, and train-validation-test splitting. Our analysis spans recommendation paradigms, including collaborative, sequential, session-based, graph-based, knowledge-aware, context-aware, multimodal, federated, cross-domain, contrastive-learning, and LLM-based recommendation. Beyond reviewing existing practices, we introduce a unified framework and taxonomy for describing data transformations and feature-extraction strategies, distinguishing data preparation from the extraction of representations from multimodal side information. Our empirical analysis reveals a landscape dominated by a narrow set of dataset-level transformations, particularly support-driven filtering, while representation-dependent transformations remain less common. We further identify substantial heterogeneity in how auxiliary information is prepared and represented, as well as inconsistencies in the specification of data splitting protocols, where similar labels may conceal different experimental conditions.
Information Retrieval (cs.IR); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.31696 [cs.IR]
(or arXiv:2609.31696v1 [cs.IR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.31696 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 301 words
Related coverage

MedPAIR: Measuring Whether Physicians and AI Agree on What Matters in Medical QA
Snorkel AI Blog · Oct 2, 2026
What's Continual Learning, and Why Might We Expect To See It In Advanced LLM Agents?
LessWrong · Jun 12, 2026

Presentation: Adaptive Recommenders in the Real World: Inference, Evals, and System Design
InfoQ · Sep 26, 2026

**Know Who Spoke When: Build Real-Time, Multi-Speaker AI with NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Diarization**
Hugging Face · Sep 23, 2026