Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In recent years, neural models have been repeatedly touted to exhibit state-of-the-art performance in recommendation. Nevertheless, multiple recent studies have revealed that the reported state-of-the-art results of many neural recommendation models cannot be reliably replicated. A primary reason is that existing evaluations are performed under various inconsistent protocols. Correspondingly, these replicability issues make it difficult to understand how much benefit we can actually gain from these neural models. It then becomes clear that a fair and comprehensive performance comparison between traditional and neural models is needed.
Dong et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: