Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring similarity of users with qualitative preferences for service selection

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Knowledge and Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Similarity measures are essential in many preference-based personalized applications such as collaborative recommendation and web service selection. However, previous studies have been mainly focused on the similarity measures for quantitative preference rather than those for qualitative preference, though the latter has attracted much attention recently. This paper aims to fill in this gap by proposing an intuitive similarity measure for conditional qualitative preference which is represented by CP-nets. In particular, we introduce two methods, a basic and a general similarity measures, corresponding to whether two CP-nets share similar structures and contents or not. Experimental results on two real-world data sets demonstrate that our similarity measure can not only correctly reflect the changes of users’ preferences, but also be effective in identifying similar users. In addition, only by adopting the K most important attributes, the computational cost can be greatly reduced while sufficiently high accuracy is preserved. Furthermore, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our method in complementing users’ preferences by aggregating those of similar users in a scenario where users’ preferences are incomplete.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.programmableweb.com.

  2. http://www.statista.com/statistics/276623/number-of-apps-available-in-leading-app-stores/.

  3. By definition, node A is not a direct parent of node C or A itself.

  4. http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Adult.

  5. http://www.uoguelph.ca/%7eqmahmoud/qws/.

References

  1. Chen X, Zheng Z, Liu X, Huang Z, Sun H (2013) Personalized qos-aware web service recommendation and visualization. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 6(1):35–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Zhang S, Dou W, Chen J (2013) Selecting top-k composite web services using preference-aware dominance relationship. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Web services, pp 75–82

  3. Wang H, Liu W (2011) Web service selection with quantitative and qualitative user preferences. In: Proceedings of IEEE/WIC/ACM international conferences on Web intelligence and intelligent agent technology, pp 404–411

  4. Su X, Khoshgoftaar TM (2009) A survey of collaborative filtering techniques. Adv Artif Intell 2009:4:1–4:19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alsaleh S, Nayak R, Xu Y, Chen L (2011) Improving matching process in social network using implicit and explicit user information. In: Proceedings of international conference on Web technologies and applications, pp 313–320

  6. Shang T, He Q, Zhuang F, Shi Z (2013) A new similarity measure based on preference sequences for collaborative filtering. In: Proceedings of 15th Asia-Pacific Web conference. Springer, pp 384–391

  7. Sarwar B, Karypis G, Konstan J, Riedl J (2001) Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on World Wide Web, pp 285–295

  8. Goldberg K, Roeder T, Gupta D, Perkins C (2001) Eigentaste: a constant time collaborative filtering algorithm. Inf Retr 4(2):133–151

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Brafman R, Domshlak C (2009) Preference handling-an introductory tutorial. AI Mag 30(1):58–86

    Google Scholar 

  10. Koriche F, Zanuttini B (2010) Learning conditional preference networks. Artif Intell 174(11):685–703

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Hu Y, Koren Y, Volinsky C (2008) Collaborative filtering for implicit feedback datasets. In: Proceedings of the international conference on data mining, pp 263–272

  12. Lamparter S, Ankolekar A, Studer R, Grimm S (2007) Preference-based selection of highly configurable web services. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web. ACM, pp 1013–1022

  13. Doyle J, Thomason RH (1999) Background to qualitative decision theory. AI Mag 20(2):55–68

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wang H, Shao S, Zhou X, Wan C, Bouguettaya A Web service selection with incomplete or inconsistent user preferences. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on service oriented computing

  15. Balke W-T, Wagner M (2003) Towards personalized selection of web services. In: Proceedings of WWW (Alternate Paper Tracks), pp 20–24

  16. Boutilier C, Brafman R, Domshlak C, Hoos H, Poole D (2004) Cp-nets: a tool for representing and reasoning with conditional ceteris paribus preference statements. J Artif Intell Res 21:135–191

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Sun X, Liu J (2010) Representation and realization of binary-valued cp-nets in single-branch tree. In: Proceedings of the 2010 7th international conference on fuzzy systems and knowledge discovery (FSKD), vol 4, pp 1908–1911

  18. Guo G, Zhang J, Yorke-Smith N (2013) A novel bayesian similarity measure for recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI), pp 2619–2625

  19. Shardanand U, Maes P (1995) Social information filtering: algorithms for automating word of mouth. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 210–217

  20. Wang H, Zhang J, Wang H, Tang Y, Guo G (2012) Service selection based on similarity measurement for conditional qualitative preference. In: Web intelligence and intelligent agent technology (WI-IAT), 2012 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conferences on, vol 1, pp 612–619

  21. Zheng H, Zhao W, Yang J, Bouguettaya A (2013) Qos analysis for web service compositions with complex structures. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 6(3):373–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yau SS, Yin Y (2011) Qos-based service ranking and selection for servic -based systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on service computing, pp 56–63

  23. Mirmotalebi R, Ding C, Chi C-H (2012) Modeling users non-functional preferences for personalized service ranking. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on service oriented computing. Springer, pp 359–373

  24. Cui L, Li J, Zheng Y (2012) A dynamic web service composition method based on viterbi algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Web services, pp 267–271

  25. Santhanam GR, Basu S, Honavar V (2008) On utilizing qualitative preferences in web service composition: a cp-net based approach. Proc of IEEE Cong on Serv-Part I:538–544

    Google Scholar 

  26. Xian-Yuan Z, Zhao-hui Z (2011) A cp-nets-based model and verification for consumer-centric information service composition. In: Proceedings of international conference on internet technology and applications (iTAP), pp 1–4

  27. Santhanam GR, Basu S, Honavar V (2009) Web service substitution based on preferences over non-functional attributes. In: Proceedings of the international conference on services computing, pp 210–217

  28. Zheng Z, Ma H, Lyu MR, King I (2011) Qos-aware web service recommendation by collaborative filtering. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 4(2):140–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. De Meo P, Quattrone G, Ursino D (2010) A query expansion and user profile enrichment approach to improve the performance of recommender systems operating on a folksonomy. User Model User-Adap Inter 20(1):41–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lv M, Chen L, Chen G (2013) Mining user similarity based on routine activities. Inf Sci 236:17–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Xiaoping L (2015) User similarity measure method based on the comparison model of psychology. In: Measuring technology and mechatronics automation (ICMTMA), 2015 seventh international conference on. IEEE, pp 1386–1389

  32. Xu J, Yue K, Li J, Wang F, Liu W (2014) An approach for discovering user similarity in social networks based on the bayesian network and mapreduce. In: Behavior, economic and social computing (BESC), 2014 international conference on. IEEE, pp 1–7

  33. Resnick P, Iacovou N, Suchak M, Bergstrom P, Riedl J (1994) Grouplens: an open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews. In: Proceedings of the 1994 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, pp 175–186

  34. Adomavicius G, Tuzhilin A (2005) Toward the next generation of recommender systems: a survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 17(6):734–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Herlocker JL, Konstan JA, Terveen LG, Riedl JT (2004) Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems. ACM Trans Inf Syst (TOIS) 22(1):5–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lathia N, Hailes S, Capra L (2007) Private distributed collaborative filtering using estimated concordance measures. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on recommender systems, pp 1–8

  37. C. Ding, He X, Husbands P, Zha H, Simon H (2002) Pagerank, hits and a unified framework for link analysis. In: Proceedings of the 25th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, pp 353–354

  38. Lizorkin D, Velikhov P, Grinev M, Turdakov D (2010) Accuracy estimate and optimization techniques for simrank computation. Proc VLDB Endow 19(1):45–66

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lu W, Janssen J, Milios E, Japkowicz N (2001) Node similarity in networked information spaces. In: Proceedings of the 2001 conference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative Research. IBM Press, pp 11–25

  40. Alrifai M, Risse T (2009) Combining global optimization with local selection for efficient qos-aware service composition. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World Wide Web. ACM, pp 881–890

  41. Wang H, Zhang J, Sun W, Song H, Guo G, Zhou X (2012) Wcp-nets: a weighted extension to cp-nets for web service selection. In: Proceedings of 10th international conference on service-oriented computing. Springer, pp 298–312

  42. Guo G, Zhang J, Thalmann D (2012) A simple but effective method to incorporate trusted neighbors in recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization (UMAP)

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by NSFC Projects (Nos.61672152, 61232007, 61532013), Collaborative Innovation Centers of Novel Software Technology and Industrialization and Wireless Communications Technology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science and Engineering, Southeast University, SIPAILOU 2, Nanjing, 210096, China

    Hongbing Wang, Hualan Wang & Yangyu Tang

  2. School of Computer Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Guibing Guo & Jie Zhang

Authors
  1. Hongbing Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hualan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guibing Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yangyu Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jie Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hongbing Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, H., Wang, H., Guo, G. et al. Measuring similarity of users with qualitative preferences for service selection. Knowl Inf Syst 51, 561–594 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-016-0985-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-016-0985-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation