An Efficient Approach to Generating Location-Sensitive Recommendations in Ad-hoc Social Network Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social recommendation has been popular and successful in various urban sustainable applications such as online sharing, products recommendation and shopping services. These applications allow users to form several implicit social networks through their daily social interactions. The users in such social networks can rate some interesting items and give comments. The majority of the existing studies have investigated the rating prediction and recommendation of items based on user-item bipartite graph and user-user social graph, so called social recommendation. However, the spatial factor was not considered in their recommendation mechanisms. With the rapid development of the service of location-based social networks, the spatial information gradually affects the quality and correlation of rating and recommendation of items. This paper proposes spatial social union (SSU), an approach of similarity measurement between two users that integrates the interconnection among users, items and locations. The SSU-aware location-sensitive recommendation algorithm is then devised. We evaluate and compare the proposed approach with the existing rating prediction and item recommendation algorithms subject to a real-life data set. Experimental results show that the proposed SSU-aware recommendation algorithm is more effective in recommending items with the better consideration of user's preference and location.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".