Research on Recommendation Framework for Personalized Push of Cultural and Creative Products in Tourist Cities Based on Multi-Level Computational User Profiling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, the development of cultural tourism has become a new trend of urban development, and how to use modern technology to realize the innovative development of urban cultural tourism has become a key issue to be considered in the process of urban construction.The research combines the Web domain ontology to construct a multi-level user portrait master model, which mainly includes four sub-models: retailer static attribute vector model, retailer domain dimension model, retailer marketing ability model and retailer social dimension model.The FCM algorithm based on the improved AP algorithm is utilized to cluster the user portraits, and the user portrait clusters obtained by the method studied in this paper perform well with an average number of iterations and an average time consumed of 21.3 and 60.35 compared with the traditional K-Means algorithm, the improved K-Means algorithm, and the traditional FCM algorithm, respectively.Then a personalized recommendation method for tourism products based on MAGFM is proposed, which achieves Top-N recommendation of tourism products by calculating the total interest value of users and the comprehensive similarity of tourism products.And test and analyze in the tourism e-commerce platform, the results show that the recommendation algorithm proposed in this paper has higher effectiveness compared with the traditional recommendation algorithm.Finally, the research content builds a personalized recommendation system for tourism cultural and creative products.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".