Improving Methodological Standards in Recommender Systems Offline Evaluation

Offline evaluation is the predominant method for scientific research in recommender systems, enabling the comparison of alternative recommendation approaches using pre-collected datasets and computational metrics without involving human participants. However, recent reproducibility studies reveal that many offline evaluations in the literature lack scientific rigor or adopt research practices that cast doubt on the validity of their findings. A particularly common and ultimately catastrophic flaw is the comparison of newly proposed machine learning models against untuned or poorly tuned baseline models. Combined with limited reproducibility, such practices raise serious concerns about the true progress achieved by increasingly complex recommendation algorithms. In this editorial, we argue for stronger methodological standards and summarize essential guidance and best practices for conducting rigorous offline evaluations of recommender systems. Accordingly, ACM Transactions on Recommender Systems will place increased emphasis on methodological rigor in all future submissions, with particular priority given to work that provides comprehensive reproducibility materials and clearly documents the tuning procedures used for baseline models.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACM Transactions on Recommender Systems
Published
2026-04-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3800587
Primary Topic
Recommender Systems and Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Improving Methodological Standards in Recommender Systems Offline Evaluation

Dietmar Jannach, Li Chen
ACM Transactions on Recommender Systems
Recommender Systems and Techniques
article

Improving Methodological Standards in Recommender Systems Offline Evaluation

Dietmar Jannach, Li Chen
article en

Abstract

Offline evaluation is the predominant method for scientific research in recommender systems, enabling the comparison of alternative recommendation approaches using pre-collected datasets and computational metrics without involving human participants. However, recent reproducibility studies reveal that many offline evaluations in the literature lack scientific rigor or adopt research practices that cast doubt on the validity of their findings. A particularly common and ultimately catastrophic flaw is the comparison of newly proposed machine learning models against untuned or poorly tuned baseline models. Combined with limited reproducibility, such practices raise serious concerns about the true progress achieved by increasingly complex recommendation algorithms. In this editorial, we argue for stronger methodological standards and summarize essential guidance and best practices for conducting rigorous offline evaluations of recommender systems. Accordingly, ACM Transactions on Recommender Systems will place increased emphasis on methodological rigor in all future submissions, with particular priority given to work that provides comprehensive reproducibility materials and clearly documents the tuning procedures used for baseline models.

ACM Transactions on Recommender SystemsVol. 4(3)
Hong Kong Baptist University (HK), University of Klagenfurt (AT)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Recommender Systems and Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Improving Methodological Standards in Recommender Systems Offline Evaluation — Dietmar Jannach, Li Chen · ACM Transactions on Recommender Systems (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS