skip to main content
research-article

BOXREC: Recommending a Box of Preferred Outfits in Online Shopping

Published:25 September 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Fashionable outfits are generally created by expert fashionistas, who use their creativity and in-depth understanding of fashion to make attractive outfits. Over the past few years, automation of outfit composition has gained much attention from the research community. Most of the existing outfit recommendation systems focus on pairwise item compatibility prediction (using visual and text features) to score an outfit combination having several items, followed by recommendation of top-n outfits or a capsule wardrobe having a collection of outfits based on user’s fashion taste. However, none of these consider a user’s preference of price range for individual clothing types or an overall shopping budget for a set of items. In this article, we propose a box recommendation framework—BOXREC—which at first collects user preferences across different item types (namely, top-wear, bottom-wear, and foot-wear) including price range of each type and a maximum shopping budget for a particular shopping session. It then generates a set of preferred outfits by retrieving all types of preferred items from the database (according to user specified preferences including price ranges), creates all possible combinations of three preferred items (belonging to distinct item types), and verifies each combination using an outfit scoring framework—BOXREC-OSF. Finally, it provides a box full of fashion items, such that different combinations of the items maximize the number of outfits suitable for an occasion while satisfying maximum shopping budget. We create an extensively annotated dataset of male fashion items across various types and categories (each having associated price) and a manually annotated positive and negative formal as well as casual outfit dataset. We consider a set of recently published pairwise compatibility prediction methods as competitors of BOXREC-OSF. Empirical results show superior performance of BOXREC-OSF over the baseline methods. We found encouraging results by performing both quantitative and qualitative analysis of the recommendations produced by BOXREC. Finally, based on user feedback corresponding to the recommendations given by BOXREC, we show that disliked or unpopular items can be a part of attractive outfits.

References

  1. Dzmitry Bahdanau, Kyunghyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. 2015. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR’15). 1--15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Ken Chatfield, Karen Simonyan, Andrea Vedaldi, and Andrew Zisserman. 2014. Return of the devil in the details: Delving deep into convolution nets. In Proceedings of the 2014 British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC’14). 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Wen Chen, Pipei Huang, Jiaming Xu, Xin Guo, Cheng Guo, Fei Sun, Chao Li, Andreas Pfadler, Huan Zhao, and Binqiang Zhao. 2019. POG: Personalized outfit generation for fashion recommendation at alibaba ifashion. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Knowledge Discovery 8 Data Mining (KDD’19). 2662--2670.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Chen Cheng, Haiqin Yang, Irwin King, and Michael R. Lyu. 2016. A unified point-of-interest recommendation framework in location-based social networks. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 8, 1 (2016), 10:1--10:21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Jia Deng, Wei Dong, Richard Socher, Li-Jia Li, Kai Li, and Li Fei-Fei. 2009. ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’09). 248--255.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Xue Dong, Xuemeng Song, Fuli Feng, Peiguang Jing, Xin-Shun Xu, and Liqiang Nie. 2019. Personalized capsule wardrobe creation with garment and user modeling. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’19). 302--310.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Xavier Glorot and Yoshua Bengio. 2010. Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks. In Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS’10). 249--256.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Nikita Golubtsov, Daniel Galper, and Andrey Filchenkov. 2016. Active adaptation of expert-based suggestions in ladieswear recommender system lookbooksclub via reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 2016 Biologically Inspired Cognitive Architectures for Young Scientists (BICA’16). 61--69.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Aristide Grange, Imed Kacem, Karine Laurent, and Sébastien Martin. 2015. On the knapsack problem under merging objects’ constraints. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Computers 8 Industrial Engineering (CIE’15). 1359--1368.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Aristide Grange, Imed Kacem, and Sébastien Martin. 2018. Algorithms for the bin packing problem with overlapping items. Comput. Industr. Eng. 115 (2018), 331--341.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Xianjing Han, Xuemeng Song, Yiyang Yao, Xin-Shun Xu, and Liqiang Nie. 2020. Neural compatibility modeling with probabilistic knowledge distillation. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 29 (2020), 871--882.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Xintong Han, Zuxuan Wu, Yu-Gang Jiang, and Larry S. Davis. 2017. Learning fashion compatibility with bidirectional LSTMs. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’17). 1078--1086.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’16). 770--778.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Tong He and Yang Hu. 2018. FashionNet: Personalized outfit recommendation with deep neural network. CoRR abs/1810.02443v1 (2018), 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Yuhang He and Long Chen. 2016. Fast fashion guided clothing image retrieval: Delving deeper into what feature makes fashion. In Proceedings of the 2016 Asian Conference on Computer Vision (ACCV’16). 134--149.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Shintami Chusnul Hidayati, Cheng-Chun Hsu, Yu-Ting Chang, Kai-Lung Hua, Jianlong Fu, and Wen-Huang Cheng. 2018. What dress fits me best? fashion recommendation on the clothing style for personal body shape. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’18). 438--446.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Wei Lin Hsiao and Kristen Grauman. 2018. Creating capsule wardrobes from fashion images. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’18). 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Wei-Lin Hsiao and Kristen Grauman. 2019. ViBE: Dressing for diverse body shapes. CoRR abs/1912.06697v2 (2019), 1--23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. M. Hadi Kiapour, Xufeng Han, Svetlana Lazebnik, Alexander C. Berg, and Tamara L. Berg. 2015. Where to buy it:Matching street clothing photos in online shops. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV’15). 3343--3351.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Yehuda Koren, Robert Bell, and Chris Volinsky. 2009. Matrix factorization techniques for recommender systems. IEEE Comput. Soc. Press 42, 8 (2009), 30--37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Dongjoo Lee, Sung Eun Park, Minsuk Kahng, Sangkeun Lee, and Sang goo Lee. 2010. Exploiting contextual information from event logs for personalized recommendation. In Computer and Information Science. Studies in Computational Intelligence, R. Lee (Ed.), Vol. 317. 121--139.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Daniel D. Lee and H. Sebastian Seung. 2000. Algorithms for non-negative matrix factorization. In Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS’00). 535--541.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Kedan Li, Chen Liu, Ranjitha Kumar, and David Forsyth. 2019. Using discriminative methods to learn fashion compatibility across datasets. CoRR abs/1906.07273v1 (2019), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Yuncheng Li, Liangliang Cao, Jiang Zhu, and Jiebo Luo. 2017. Mining fashion outfit composition using an end-to-end deep learning approach on set data. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 19, 8 (2017), 1946--1955.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Yujie Lin, Pengjie Ren, Zhumin Chen, Zhaochun Ren, Jun Ma, and Maarten de Rijke. 2019. Explainable outfit recommendation with joint outfit matching and comment generation. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 32, 8 (2019), 1502--1516.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Nathan N. Liu, Luheng He, and Min Zhao. 2013. Social temporal collaborative ranking for context aware movie recommendation. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 4, 1 (2013), 15:1--15:26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Si Liu, Zheng Song, Guangcan Liu, Changsheng Xu, Hanqing Lu, and Shuicheng Yan. 2012. Street-to-shop: Cross-scenario clothing retrieval via parts alignment and auxiliary set. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’12). 3330--3337.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. 2019. Decoupled weight decay regularization. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR’19). 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Silvano Martello and Paolo Toth. 1990. Bin-packing problem. Knapsack Problems: Algorithms and Computer Implementations (1990), 221--245.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Hai Thanh Nguyen, Thomas Almenningen, Martin Havig, Herman Schistad, Anders Kofod-Petersen, Helge Langseth, and Heri Ramampiaro. 2014. Learning to rank for personalised fashion recommender systems via implicit feedback. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Mining Intelligence and Knowledge Exploration (MIKE’14). 51--61.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Razvan Pascanu, Tomas Mikolov, and Yoshua Bengio. 2013. On the difficulty of training recurrent neural networks. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML’13). 1310--1318.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Ruslan Salakhutdinov and Andriy Mnih. 2007. Probabilistic matrix factorization. In Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS’07). 1257--1264.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Xuemeng Song, Fuli Feng, Jinhuan Liu, Zekun Li, Liqiang Nie, and Jun Ma. 2017. NeuroStylist: Neural compatibility modeling for clothing matching. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’17). 753--761.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Xuemeng Song, Liqiang Nie, Yinglong Wang, and Gary Marchionini. 2019. Compatibility modeling: Data and knowledge applications for clothing matching. In Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services (2019).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Christian Szegedy, Vincent Vanhoucke, Sergey Ioffe, Jon Shlens, and Zbigniew Wojna. 2016. Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’16). 2818--2826.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Reuben Tan, Mariya I. Vasileva, Kate Saenko, and Bryan A. Plummer. 2019. Learning similarity conditions without explicit supervision. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV’19). 10373--10382.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Pongsate Tangseng, Kota Yamaguchi, and Takayuki Okatani. 2017. Recommending outfits from personal closet. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW’17). 2275--2279.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Mariya I. Vasileva, Bryan A. Plummer, Krishna Dusad, Shreya Rajpal, Ranjitha Kumar, and David Forsyth. 2018. Learning type-aware embeddings for fashion compatibility. In Proceedings of the 2018 European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV’18). 405--421.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Min Xie, Laks V. S. Lakshmanan, and Peter T. Wood. 2010. Breaking out of the box of recommendations: From items to packages. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (RecSys’10). 151--158.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Jason Yosinski, Jeff Clune, Yoshua Bengio, and Hod Lipson. 2014. How transferable are features in deep neural networks? In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS’14). 3320--3328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Guoshuai Zhao, Hao Fu, Ruihua Song, Tetsuya Sakai, Zhongxia Chen, Xing Xie, and Xueming Qian. 2019. Personalized reason generation for explainable song recommendation. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 10, 4 (2019), 41:1--41:21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Yu Zheng, Chen Gao, Xiangnan He, Yong Li, and Depeng Jin. 2020. Price-aware recommendation with graph convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE’20). 275--286.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. BOXREC: Recommending a Box of Preferred Outfits in Online Shopping

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in

              Full Access

              • Published in

                cover image ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology
                ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology  Volume 11, Issue 6
                Survey Paper and Regular Paper
                December 2020
                237 pages
                ISSN:2157-6904
                EISSN:2157-6912
                DOI:10.1145/3424135
                Issue’s Table of Contents

                Copyright © 2020 ACM

                Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                Publisher

                Association for Computing Machinery

                New York, NY, United States

                Publication History

                • Published: 25 September 2020
                • Accepted: 1 June 2020
                • Revised: 1 April 2020
                • Received: 1 December 2019
                Published in tist Volume 11, Issue 6

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • research-article
                • Research
                • Refereed

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader

              HTML Format

              View this article in HTML Format .

              View HTML Format