MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156519379 · doi:10.1109/isda.2005.22

An intelligent knowledge sharing strategy featuring item-based collaborative filtering and case based reasoning

2005· article· en· W2156519379 on OpenAlexaff
Zeina Chedrawy, Syed Sibte Raza Abidi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCollaborative filteringSimilarity (geometry)Context (archaeology)Information retrievalDomain (mathematical analysis)Recommender systemInformation filtering systemCase-based reasoningAdaptation (eye)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a new approach for combining item-based collaborative filtering (CF) with case based reasoning (CBR) to pursue personalized information filtering in a knowledge sharing context. Functionally, our personalized information filtering approach allows the use of recommendations by peers with similar interests and domain experts to guide the selection of information deemed relevant to an active user's profile. We apply item-based similarity computation in a CF framework to retrieve N information objects based on the user's interests and recommended by peer. The N information objects are then subjected to a CBR based compositional adaptation method to further select relevant information objects from the N retrieved past cases in order to generate a more fine-grained recommendation.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207