Profiling vs. Time vs. Content: What does Matter for Top-k Publication Recommendation based on Twitter Profiles? - An Extended Technical Report
March 22, 2016 Β· Declared Dead Β· π ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Chifumi Nishioka, Ansgar Scherp
arXiv ID
1603.07016
Category
cs.DL: Digital Libraries
Cross-listed
cs.IR
Citations
33
Venue
ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries
Last Checked
6 months ago
Abstract
So far it is unclear how different factors of a scientific publication recommender system based on users' tweets have an influence on the recommendation performance. We examine three different factors, namely profiling method, temporal decay, and richness of content. Regarding profiling, we compare CF-IDF that replaces terms in TF-IDF by semantic concepts, HCF-IDF as novel hierarchical variant of CF-IDF, and topic modeling. As temporal decay functions, we apply sliding window and exponential decay. In terms of the richness of content, we compare recommendations using both full-texts and titles of publications and using only titles. Overall, the three factors make twelve recommendation strategies. We have conducted an online experiment with 123 participants and compared the strategies in a within-group design. The best recommendations are achieved by the strategy combining CF-IDF, sliding window, and with full-texts. However, the strategies using the novel HCF-IDF profiling method achieve similar results with just using the titles of the publications. Therefore, HCF-IDF can make recommendations when only short and sparse data is available.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Digital Libraries
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Measuring academic influence: Not all citations are equal
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The Open Access Advantage Considering Citation, Article Usage and Social Media Attention
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
A Bibliometric Review of Large Language Models Research from 2017 to 2023
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
On the Performance of Hybrid Search Strategies for Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
A Systematic Identification and Analysis of Scientists on Twitter
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted