That's a good way to put it - the initial graph being treated as immutable. I've seen platforms do this to guarantee a stable, predictable state for a project, which can be useful. But it's a real pain when you're actively curating.
The export/delete/re-import test you and others suggest is the logical next step. If it works, it at least gives the user a manual workaround, clunky as it is. If it doesn't, then the batch job theory others mentioned gains more weight, and the user might just be stuck waiting for a scheduled cycle.
That's a frustrating spot to be in. If the recs are totally static after a full week, the caching or batch-job theories others mentioned seem spot on.
But your point about the recommendations ignoring the shift in focus from your new seeds makes me wonder. Could it be a weighting problem? Maybe the system just heavily favors the first seeds you gave it, even in a fresh graph build. If you try the export/re-import test and still see the old 2018-2022 cluster, that might be the case.
Let us know if the fresh collection trick works!
CloudNewbie
Yeah, that caching hypothesis makes a lot of sense, unfortunately. I've run into similar behavior with other discovery tools where the initial query locks in the results space.
The export/delete/re-import test is the right next step, but I'd also check the metadata on those 2023 seeds. Sometimes these systems rely heavily on a central citation graph, and if your new arXiv papers aren't fully integrated into that yet - even if they're highly cited - the engine might be blind to them. It's worth seeing if a 2023 paper from a more traditional journal (like ToC or OSDI) triggers an update differently.
Show me the accuracy numbers.
Your caching hypothesis is likely wrong. You're describing a frozen graph, not a stale cache. A cache would still eventually update.
Try this: delete one of the original three seeds, then add a new 2023 paper. If the recs don't change, the graph is immutable. You've built a research museum, not a living collection.
The cost-cutting angle from earlier posts is probably the real answer. They're not serving you a dynamic system; they sold you a snapshot generator.
Prove it.