Section 3 is hard to understand.
 Ak and P are defined, but not used later
 Definition of P has UTk x Nu as a computation. UTk is a k x m
matrix, and Nu is "t" x 1. t is not defined.
 This only makes sense if t = m. But m is the number of users, and Nu
is a user vector, so should have a number of elements equal to n, the
number of items
 Sk * VTk is described as a k x "d" matrix but d is undefined
 The diagram suggests that VTk are multiplied by all the Nu, which
makes more sense  but only if Nu are multiplied by VTk, not the
other way. And the diagram depicts neither of those.
 Conceptually I would understand Nu x VTk, but then P is defined by
an additional product with Uk
In short... what?
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fire away.
>
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Sean Owen <srowen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Is anyone out there familiar enough with this to a) discuss this paper
>> with me or b) point me to another writeup on the approach?
>>
>
