RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers

Default branch main · commit 8b04df73 · scanned 5/9/2026, 6:23:22 PM

GitHub: 2,274 stars · 164 forks

AI VISIBILITY SCORE
22 /100
Critical
Category recall
0 / 2
Not recommended in any query
Rule findings
1 pass · 1 warn · 0 fail
Objective metadata checks
AI knows your name
1 / 3
Direct prompts that named your repo
HOW TO READ THIS REPORT

Action plan is what to do next — copy-pasteable changes prioritized by impact. Category visibility is the real GEO test: when a user asks an AI a brand-free question that should surface WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers, does the AI actually recommend you — or your competitors? Objective checks verify the metadata signals AI engines weight first. Self-mention check detects whether AI even knows you exist by name.

Action plan — copy-paste fixes

3 prioritized changes generated by gemini-2.5-flash. Mark items done after you ship the fix.

OVERALL DIRECTION
  • highreadme#1
    Clarify the README's opening sentence to emphasize it's a curated list

    Why:

    CURRENT
    A list of awesome papers and resources of recommender system on large language model (LLM).
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    A curated and continuously updated list of awesome papers and resources specifically focused on the intersection of recommender systems and large language models (LLMs).
  • highlicense#2
    Add a LICENSE file to the repository

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Create a `LICENSE` file in the repository root with a standard open-source license (e.g., MIT, Apache-2.0) to clarify usage terms for contributors and users.
  • mediumhomepage#3
    Add a homepage URL to the repository's About section

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Set the 'Homepage' URL in the repository's About section to `https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.19860` (or the most relevant project/survey page) to provide a direct link to the associated survey.

Category GEO backends resolved for this scan: google/gemini-2.5-flash, deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash

Category visibility — the real GEO test

Brand-free queries asked to google/gemini-2.5-flash. Did AI recommend you, or someone else?

Same questions for every model — switch tabs to compare answers and rankings.

Recall
0 / 2
0% of queries surface WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers
Avg rank
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
Google Scholar
Recommended in 1 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. Google Scholar · recommended 1×
  2. arXiv · recommended 1×
  3. ACM Digital Library · recommended 1×
  4. IEEE Xplore Digital Library · recommended 1×
  5. Semantic Scholar · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Where can I find academic papers on using large language models for personalized recommendations?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. Google Scholar
    2. arXiv
    3. ACM Digital Library
    4. IEEE Xplore Digital Library
    5. Semantic Scholar
    6. Microsoft Academic
    7. RecSys
    8. KDD
    9. WWW
    10. SIGIR
    11. NeurIPS
    12. ICML
    13. ICLR

    AI recommended 13 alternatives but never named WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    What are the latest research trends and techniques for integrating LLMs into recommender systems?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. Sentence-BERT (SBERT)
    2. MPNet
    3. OpenAI Embeddings
    4. Cohere Embeddings
    5. GPT-3.5
    6. GPT-4
    7. Llama 2
    8. Mistral
    9. Cross-Encoders
    10. Claude 2
    11. LangChain
    12. Haystack
    13. BERT
    14. RoBERTa

    AI recommended 14 alternatives but never named WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer

Objective checks

Rule-based audits of metadata signals AI engines weight most.

  • Metadata completeness
    warn

    Suggestion:

  • README presence
    pass

Self-mention check

Does AI even know your repo exists when asked about it directly?

  • Compared to common alternatives in this category, what is the core differentiator of WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers?
    pass
    AI did not name WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers — likely talking about a different project

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

  • If a team adopts WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers in production, what risks or prerequisites should they evaluate first?
    pass
    AI named WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers explicitly

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

  • In one sentence, what problem does the repo WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers solve, and who is the primary audience?
    pass
    AI did not name WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers — likely talking about a different project

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

Embed your GEO score

Drop this badge into the README of WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers. It auto-updates whenever the report is rescanned and links back to the latest report — easy public proof that you care about AI discoverability.

RepoGEO badge previewLive preview
MARKDOWN (README)
[![RepoGEO](https://repogeo.com/badge/WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers.svg)](https://repogeo.com/en/r/WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers)
HTML
<a href="https://repogeo.com/en/r/WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers"><img src="https://repogeo.com/badge/WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers.svg" alt="RepoGEO" /></a>
Pro

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

WLiK/LLM4Rec-Awesome-Papers — Lite scans stay free; this card itemizes Pro deep limits vs Lite.

  • Deep reports10 / month
  • Brand-free category queries5 vs 2 in Lite
  • Prioritized action items8 vs 3 in Lite