MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079853600 · doi:10.1145/2505323.2505332

Leveraging biosignal and collaborative filtering for context-aware recommendation

2013· article· en· W2079853600 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed F. Alhamid, Majdi Rawashdeh, Hussein Al Osman, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCollaborative filteringBiosignalRecommender systemContext (archaeology)Context modelMultimediaHuman–computer interactionWorld Wide WebQuality (philosophy)Bridge (graph theory)Context awarenessInformation retrievalFilter (signal processing)Artificial intelligencePhone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recommender systems are powerful tools that support the user in their quest to find the multimedia they are looking for. Such systems present multimedia contents or provide recommendations by taking into consideration two dimensions of inputs: content (item), and user (consumer). Little attention has been paid to increasing the quality of the experience by understanding the contextual aspect of the user when he/she wants to consume multimedia content. By including user's biological signal and leveraging collaborative filtering, we can build a context-aware model that establish the bridge between the multimedia content, and the user's context containing physiological parameters. Hence, the proposed model finds the latent preferences of users in a given context from other similar users. The model also finds the latent items consumed in a given context from other similar items. We then map context-based items for a particular user to find most relevant items in that context. Our experimental results have shown the feasibility to personalize the recommendation according to the user's context.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207