MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153860712

Create a Profile for User Using Web Usage Mining

2013· article· en· W2153860712 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zeinab khademali, Nima Attarzadeh, Mohammad Mehdi LotfiNejad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of academic and applied studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePersonalizationRecommender systemSession (web analytics)User profileCluster analysisWeb miningInformation retrievalData miningSimilarity (geometry)User modelingWeb navigationWorld Wide WebWeb pageMachine learningUser interfaceArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we try to classify navigation patterns of web users automatically; therefore, a new method is presented in order to classify the user’s navigation patterns and predict the user’s future requirements. This method is based on the mining of web server logs. Thus, in order to build user’s profile, a new method is introduced that, by registering user’s setting and similarity measure of active user to neighboring users, constructs indices implicitly and brings them up to date based on created changes. In effect, we improve the performance of recommender engine by using navigation patterns of user and clustering similar users. Furthermore, we test the precision for different inputs in the model simulated based on the neural network and we determine that if, in registering user’s profile, in addition to behavior history, current session is focused on as well, recommender engine will offer better results. This method that is based on user’s navigation patterns is capable of offering the results from recommender engines based on user’s requirement and interest. Advantage is evaluated based on two responsibilities: classification and prediction. The system has reached classification precision close to and prediction precision of about .This method can help web personalization and website better organization.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of academic and applied studiesSame topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207