MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1589460217 · doi:10.1109/icws.2015.62

An Integrated-Model QoS-Based Graph for Web Service Recommendation

2015· article· en· W1589460217 on OpenAlexaff
Abdullah Abdullah, Xining Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJaccard indexWeb serviceCollaborative filteringQuality of serviceInteroperabilityRecommender systemGraphData miningWorld Wide WebMachine learningComputer networkTheoretical computer scienceCluster analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web services (WS) are integrated software components that facilitate interoperable machine-to-machine interaction over a network. In the era of Web 2.0, companies worldwide are actively deploying Web services within their business environments. As a result, designing effective Web service recommendation mechanisms based on Quality of Service (QoS) is attracting more attention. However, traditional Neighborhood-based Collaborative Filtering (CF) models fail to capture the actual relationships between users or services due to data sparsity. On the other hand, Random Walk (RW) algorithm, which has been categorized as a sparsity-tolerant recommendation approach, suffers from poor performance in terms of recommendation accuracy. In this paper, we aim at designing a recommendation model that achieves high recommendation accuracy over the transitional RW based model. First, we propose an Integrated-Model QoS-based Graph (IMQG), in which users and services represent the nodes while weighted QoS magnitudes and User/Service similarity measurements serve as the edges. We use Jaccard coefficient in several variants to separately compute similarities of both Users and Services. Then, Top-k Random Walk algorithm is applied to generate final recommendation list to active users. Finally, to demonstrate the effectiveness of our model, comprehensive experiments are conducted on a real-world QoS dataset. Analysis of the results shows high improvement in recommendation accuracy with more tolerance to data sparsity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207