This study examines the performance of item-based k-Nearest Neighbors (ItemKNN) algorithms in the RecBole and LensKit recommender system libraries. Using four data sets (Anime, Modcloth, ML-100K, and ML-1M), we assess each library's efficiency, accuracy, and scalability, focusing primarily on normalized discounted cumulative gain (nDCG). Our results show that RecBole outperforms LensKit on two of three metrics on the ML-100K data set: it achieved an 18% higher nDCG, 14% higher precision, and 35% lower recall. To ensure a fair comparison, we adjusted LensKit's nDCG calculation to match RecBole's method. This alignment made the performance more comparable, with LensKit achieving an nDCG of 0.2540 and RecBole 0.2674. Differences in similarity matrix calculations were identified as the main cause of performance deviations. After modifying LensKit to retain only the top K similar items, both libraries showed nearly identical nDCG values across all data sets. For instance, both achieved an nDCG of 0.2586 on the ML-1M data set with the same random seed. Initially, LensKit's original implementation only surpassed RecBole in the ModCloth dataset.

Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) has greatly advanced applications of Machine Learning (ML) including model compression, machine translation, and computer vision. Recommender Systems (RecSys) can be seen as an application of ML. Yet, AutoML has found little attention in the RecSys community; nor has RecSys found notable attention in the AutoML community. Only few and relatively simple Automated Recommender Systems (AutoRecSys) libraries exist that adopt AutoML techniques. However, these libraries are based on student projects and do not offer the features and thorough development of AutoML libraries. We set out to determine how AutoML libraries perform in the scenario of an inexperienced user who wants to implement a recommender system. We compared the predictive performance of 60 AutoML, AutoRecSys, ML, and RecSys algorithms from 15 libraries, including a mean predictor baseline, on 14 explicit feedback RecSys datasets. To simulate the perspective of an inexperienced user, the algorithms were evaluated with default hyperparameters. We found that AutoML and AutoRecSys libraries performed best. AutoML libraries performed best for six of the 14 datasets (43%), but it was not always the same AutoML library performing best. The single-best library was the AutoRecSys library Auto-Surprise, which performed best on five datasets (36%). On three datasets (21%), AutoML libraries performed poorly, and RecSys libraries with default parameters performed best. Although, while obtaining 50% of all placements in the top five per dataset, RecSys algorithms fall behind AutoML on average. ML algorithms generally performed the worst.

Since 2010, we have built and maintained LensKit, an open-source toolkit for building, researching, and learning about recommender systems. We have successfully used the software in a wide range of recommender systems experiments, to support education in traditional classroom and online settings, and as the algorithmic backend for user-facing recommendation services in movies and books. This experience, along with community feedback, has surfaced a number of challenges with LensKit's design and environmental choices. In response to these challenges, we are developing a new set of tools that leverage the PyData stack to enable the kinds of research experiments and educational experiences that we have been able to deliver with LensKit, along with new experimental structures that the existing code makes difficult. The result is a set of research tools that should significantly increase research velocity and provide much smoother integration with other software such as Keras while maintaining the same level of reproducibility as a LensKit experiment. In this paper, we reflect on the LensKit project, particularly on our experience using it for offline evaluation experiments, and describe the next-generation LKPY tools for enabling new offline evaluations and experiments with flexible, open-ended designs and well-tested evaluation primitives.