User-Review Oriented Social Recommender System for Event Planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recommender system is used to suggest product or topic based on user’s interest. Existing recommender system have focused on books, product, music etc. The problem in existing recommender system is that wedding/event based suggestions are not available. In the modern information era; storage, communication has been a challenge due to information veracity, volume, and velocity. Due to the constant and exponential growth of information, the utilization of information for context-oriented services is not productive. In this paper, a wedding planner recommender system framework has been proposed based on hybrid approach i.e., content based, collaborative filtering technique. The motive of proposed framework is to generate user-specific recommendations for different tasks related to the event specially wedding event, analyzed from the user comments on his social networking portal. Its main objective is to assist the user for organizing the events by suggesting specific vendors needed to arrange the event activities. Also, it would enhance the sales of location sensitive products in social commerce. The trial study conducted using a set of Facebook users is carried out to validate the proposed recommendation system framework. The success of the proposed framework is reported in terms of the level of user satisfaction achieved.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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".