Personalized information retrieval based on context and ontological knowledge

The article has been accepted for publication and appeared in a revised form, subsequent to peer review and/or editorial input by Cambridge University PressExtended papers from C&O-2006, the second International Workshop on Contexts and Ontologies, Theory, Practice and Applications1 collocated with the seventeenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI)Context modeling has been long acknowledged as a key aspect in a wide variety of problem domains. In this paper we focus on the combination of contextualization and personalization methods to improve the performance of personalized information retrieval. The key aspects in our proposed approach are a) the explicit distinction between historic user context and live user context, b) the use of ontology-driven representations of the domain of discourse, as a common, enriched representational ground for content meaning, user interests, and contextual conditions, enabling the definition of effective means to relate the three of them, and c) the introduction of fuzzy representations as an instrument to properly handle the uncertainty and imprecision involved in the automatic interpretation of meanings, user attention, and user wishes. Based on a formal grounding at the representational level, we propose methods for the automatic extraction of persistent semantic user preferences, and live, ad-hoc user interests, which are combined in order to improve the accuracy and reliability of personalization for retrieval.This research was partially supported by the European Commission under contracts FP6-001765 aceMedia and FP6-027685 MESH. The expressed content is the view of the authors but not necessarily the view of the aceMedia or MESH projects as a whole

Knowledge-Based Techniques for Scholarly Data Access: Towards Automatic Curation

Accessing up-to-date and quality scientific literature is a critical preliminary step in any research activity. Identifying relevant scholarly literature for the extents of a given task or application is, however a complex and time consuming activity. Despite the large number of tools developed over the years to support scholars in their literature surveying activity, such as Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic search, and others, the best way to access quality papers remains asking a domain expert who is actively involved in the field and knows research trends and directions. State of the art systems, in fact, either do not allow exploratory search activity, such as identifying the active research directions within a given topic, or do not offer proactive features, such as content recommendation, which are both critical to researchers. To overcome these limitations, we strongly advocate a paradigm shift in the development of scholarly data access tools: moving from traditional information retrieval and filtering tools towards automated agents able to make sense of the textual content of published papers and therefore monitor the state of the art. Building such a system is however a complex task that implies tackling non trivial problems in the fields of Natural Language Processing, Big Data Analysis, User Modelling, and Information Filtering. In this work, we introduce the concept of Automatic Curator System and present its fundamental components.openDottorato di ricerca in InformaticaopenDe Nart, Dari

CHORUS Deliverable 2.1: State of the Art on Multimedia Search Engines

Based on the information provided by European projects and national initiatives related to multimedia search as well as domains experts that participated in the CHORUS Think-thanks and workshops, this document reports on the state of the art related to multimedia content search from, a technical, and socio-economic perspective. The technical perspective includes an up to date view on content based indexing and retrieval technologies, multimedia search in the context of mobile devices and peer-to-peer networks, and an overview of current evaluation and benchmark inititiatives to measure the performance of multimedia search engines. From a socio-economic perspective we inventorize the impact and legal consequences of these technical advances and point out future directions of research

개인화 검색 및 파트너쉽 선정을 위한 사용자 프로파일링

학위논문 (박사)-- 서울대학교 대학원 : 치의과학과, 2014. 2. 김홍기.The secret of change is to focus all of your energy not on fighting the old, but on building the new. - Socrates The automatic identification of user intention is an important but highly challenging research problem whose solution can greatly benefit information systems. In this thesis, I look at the problem of identifying sources of user interests, extracting latent semantics from it, and modelling it as a user profile. I present algorithms that automatically infer user interests and extract hidden semantics from it, specifically aimed at improving personalized search. I also present a methodology to model user profile as a buyer profile or a seller profile, where the attributes of the profile are populated from a controlled vocabulary. The buyer profiles and seller profiles are used in partnership match. In the domain of personalized search, first, a novel method to construct a profile of user interests is proposed which is based on mining anchor text. Second, two methods are proposed to builder a user profile that gather terms from a folksonomy system where matrix factorization technique is explored to discover hidden relationship between them. The objective of the methods is to discover latent relationship between terms such that contextually, semantically, and syntactically related terms could be grouped together, thus disambiguating the context of term usage. The profile of user interests is also analysed to judge its clustering tendency and clustering accuracy. Extensive evaluation indicates that a profile of user interests, that can correctly or precisely disambiguate the context of user query, has a significant impact on the personalized search quality. In the domain of partnership match, an ontology termed as partnership ontology is proposed. The attributes or concepts, in the partnership ontology, are features representing context of work. It is used by users to lay down their requirements as buyer profiles or seller profiles. A semantic similarity measure is defined to compute a ranked list of matching seller profiles for a given buyer profile.1 Introduction 1 1.1 User Profiling for Personalized Search . . . . . . . . 9 1.1.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.1.2 Research Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.2 User Profiling for Partnership Match . . . . . . . . 18 1.2.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 1.2.2 Research Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 1.3 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 1.4 System Architecture - Personalized Search . . . . . 29 1.5 System Architecture - Partnership Match . . . . . . 31 1.6 Organization of this Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . 32 2 Background 35 2.1 Introduction to Social Web . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.2 Matrix Decomposition Methods . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2.3 User Interest Profile For Personalized Web Search Non Folksonomy based . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 2.4 User Interest Profile for Personalized Web Search Folksonomy based . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 2.5 Personalized Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 2.6 Partnership Match . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3 Mining anchor text for building User Interest Profile: A non-folksonomy based personalized search 56 3.1 Exclusively Yours' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 3.1.1 Infer User Interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 3.1.2 Weight Computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 3.1.3 Query Expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 3.2 Exclusively Yours' Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.3 Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 3.3.1 DataSet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 3.3.2 Evaluation Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 3.3.3 User Profile Efficacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 3.3.4 Personalized vs. Non-Personalized Results . 76 3.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 4 Matrix factorization for building Clustered User Interest Profile: A folksonomy based personalized search 82 4.1 Aggregating tags from user search history . . . . . 86 4.2 Latent Semantics in UIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 4.2.1 Computing the tag-tag Similarity matrix . . 90 4.2.2 Tag Clustering to generate svdCUIP and modSvdCUIP 98 4.3 Personalized Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.4 Experimental Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.4.1 Data Set and Experiment Methodology . . . 103 4.4.1.1 Custom Data Set and Evaluation Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 4.4.1.2 AOL Query Data Set and Evaluation Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 4.4.1.3 Experiment set up to estimate the value of k and d . . . . . . . . . . 107 4.4.1.4 Experiment set up to compare the proposed approaches with other approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 4.4.2 Experiment Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 4.4.2.1 Clustering Tendency . . . . . . . . 111 4.4.2.2 Determining the value for dimension parameter, k, for the Custom Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 4.4.2.3 Determining the value of distinctness parameter, d, for the Custom data set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 4.4.2.4 CUIP visualization . . . . . . . . . 117 4.4.2.5 Determining the value of the dimension reduction parameter k for the AOL data set. . . . . . . . . . . . 119 4.4.2.6 Determining the value of distinctness parameter, d, for the AOL data set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 4.4.2.7 Time to generate svdCUIP and modSvd-CUIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 4.4.2.8 Comparison of the svdCUIP, modSvd-CUIP, and tfIdfCUIP for different classes of queries . . . . . . . . . . 123 4.4.2.9 Comparing all five methods - Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 4.4.3 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 5 User Profiling for Partnership Match 133 5.1 Supplier Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 5.2 Criteria for Partnership Establishment . . . . . . . 140 5.3 Partnership Ontology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 5.4 Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 5.4.1 Buyer Profile and Seller Profile . . . . . . . 153 5.4.2 Semantic Similarity Measure . . . . . . . . . 155 5.5 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 5.6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 6 Conclusion 164 6.1 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 6.1.1 Degree of Personalization . . . . . . . . . . . 167 6.1.2 Filter Bubble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 6.1.3 IPR issues in Partnership Match . . . . . . . 169 Bibliography 170 Appendices 193 .1 Pairs of Query and target URL . . . . . . . . . . . 194 .2 Examples of Expanded Queries . . . . . . . . . . . 197 .3 An example of svdCUIP, modSvdCUIP, tfIdfCUIP 198Docto

Combination of web usage, content and structure information for diverse web mining applications in the tourism context and the context of users with disabilities

188 p.This PhD focuses on the application of machine learning techniques for behaviourmodelling in different types of websites. Using data mining techniques two aspects whichare problematic and difficult to solve have been addressed: getting the system todynamically adapt to possible changes of user preferences, and to try to extract theinformation necessary to ensure the adaptation in a transparent manner for the users,without infringing on their privacy. The work in question combines information of differentnature such as usage information, content information and website structure and usesappropriate web mining techniques to extract as much knowledge as possible from thewebsites. The extracted knowledge is used for different purposes such as adaptingwebsites to the users through proposals of interesting links, so that the users can get therelevant information more easily and comfortably; for discovering interests or needs ofusers accessing the website and to inform the service providers about it; or detectingproblems during navigation.Systems have been successfully generated for two completely different fields: thefield of tourism, working with the website of bidasoa turismo (www.bidasoaturismo.com)and, the field of disabled people, working with discapnet website (www.discapnet.com)from ONCE/Tecnosite foundation

An ontology-based recommender system using scholar's background knowledge

Scholar’s recommender systems recommend scientific articles based on the similarity of articles to scholars’ profiles, which are a collection of keywords that scholars are interested in. Recent profiling approaches extract keywords from the scholars’ information such as publications, searching keywords, and homepages, and train a reference ontology, which is often a general-purpose ontology, in order to profile the scholars’ interests. However, such approaches do not consider the scholars’ knowledge because the recommender system only recommends articles which are syntactically similar to articles that scholars have already visited, while scholars are interested in articles which contain comparatively new knowledge. In addition, the systems do not support multi-area property of scholars’ knowledge as researchers usually do research in multiple topics simultaneously and are expected to receive focused-topic articles in each recommendation. To address these problems, this study develops a domain-specific reference ontology by merging six Web taxonomies and exploits Wikipedia as a conflict resolver of ontologies. Then, the knowledge items from the scholars’ information are extracted, transformed by DBpedia, and clustered into relevant topics in order to model the multi-area property of scholars’ knowledge. Finally, the clustered knowledge items are mapped to the reference ontology by using DBpedia to create clustered profiles. In addition a semantic similarity algorithm is adapted to the clustered profiles, which enables recommendation of focused-topic articles that contain new knowledge. To evaluate performance of the proposed approach, three different data sets from scholars’ information in Computer Science domain are created, and the precisions in different cases are measured. The proposed method, in comparison with the baseline methods, improves the average precision by 6% when the new reference ontology along with the full scholars’ knowledge is utilized, by an extra 7.2% when scholars’ knowledge is transformed by DBpedia, and further 8.9% when clustered profile is applied. Experimental results certify that using knowledge items instead of keywords for profiling as well as transforming the knowledge items by DBpedia can significantly improve the recommendation performance. Besides, the domain-specific reference ontology can effectively capture the full scholars’ knowledge which results to more accurate profiling

Generic adaptation framework for unifying adaptive web-based systems

The Generic Adaptation Framework (GAF) research project first and foremost creates a common formal framework for describing current and future adaptive hypermedia (AHS) and adaptive webbased systems in general. It provides a commonly agreed upon taxonomy and a reference model that encompasses the most general architectures of the present and future, including conventional AHS, and different types of personalization-enabling systems and applications such as recommender systems (RS) personalized web search, semantic web enabled applications used in personalized information delivery, adaptive e-Learning applications and many more. At the same time GAF is trying to bring together two (seemingly not intersecting) views on the adaptation: a classical pre-authored type, with conventional domain and overlay user models and data-driven adaptation which includes a set of data mining, machine learning and information retrieval tools. To bring these research fields together we conducted a number GAF compliance studies including RS, AHS, and other applications combining adaptation, recommendation and search. We also performed a number of real systems’ case-studies to prove the point and perform a detailed analysis and evaluation of the framework. Secondly it introduces a number of new ideas in the field of AH, such as the Generic Adaptation Process (GAP) which aligns with a layered (data-oriented) architecture and serves as a reference adaptation process. This also helps to understand the compliance features mentioned earlier. Besides that GAF deals with important and novel aspects of adaptation enabling and leveraging technologies such as provenance and versioning. The existence of such a reference basis should stimulate AHS research and enable researchers to demonstrate ideas for new adaptation methods much more quickly than if they had to start from scratch. GAF will thus help bootstrap any adaptive web-based system research, design, analysis and evaluation