Intelligent Information Personalization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter introduces intelligent information personalization as an approach to personalize the webbased information retrieval experiences based on an individual’s interests, needs and goals. We present intelligent techniques to dynamically compose new personalized information by adapting existing web-based information in line with a dynamic user-model, whilst simultaneously addressing linguistic, factual and functional requirements. This chapter will highlight the different facets, tasks and issues concerning intelligent information personalization to guide researchers in designing intelligent information personalization applications. The chapter presents intelligent methods that address information personalization at the content level as opposed to the traditional approaches that focus on interface level information personalization. To assist researchers in designing intelligent information personalization applications we present our information personalization framework, named AdWISE (Adaptive Webmediated Information and Services Environment), to demonstrate how to systematically integrate various intelligent methods to achieve information personalization. We will conclude with a commentary on the future outlook for intelligent information personalization.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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 it