MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240886852 · doi:10.1002/asi.20631

Personalized recommendation with adaptive mixture of markov models

2007· article· en· W4240886852 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Liu, Aijun An

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMarkov chainMarkov modelCluster analysisTask (project management)Selection (genetic algorithm)Adaptation (eye)Machine learningHidden Markov modelThe InternetData miningArtificial intelligenceInformation retrievalWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With more and more information available on the Internet, the task of making personalized recommendations to assist the user's navigation has become increasingly important. Considering there might be millions of users with different backgrounds accessing a Web site everyday, it is infeasible to build a separate recommendation system for each user. To address this problem, clustering techniques can first be employed to discover user groups. Then, user navigation patterns for each group can be discovered, to allow the adaptation of a Web site to the interest of each individual group. In this paper, we propose to model user access sequences as stochastic processes, and a mixture of Markov models based approach is taken to cluster users and to capture the sequential relationships inherent in user access histories. Several important issues that arise in constructing the Markov models are also addressed. The first issue lies in the complexity of the mixture of Markov models. To improve the efficiency of building/maintaining the mixture of Markov models, we develop a lightweight adapt‐ive algorithm to update the model parameters without recomputing model parameters from scratch. The second issue concerns the proper selection of training data for building the mixture of Markov models. We investigate two different training data selection strategies and perform extensive experiments to compare their effectiveness on a real dataset that is generated by a Web‐based knowledge management system, Livelink.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society for Information Science and TechnologySame topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207