EFCNN: A Restricted Convolutional Neural Network for Expert Finding

  • Yifeng ZhaoEmail author
  • Jie Tang
  • Zhengxiao Du
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11440)


Expert finding, aiming at identifying experts for given topics (queries) from expert-related corpora, has been widely studied in different contexts, but still heavily suffers from low matching quality due to inefficient representations for experts and topics (queries). In this paper, we present an interesting model, referred to as EFCNN, based on restricted convolution to address the problem. Different from traditional models for expert finding, EFCNN offers an end-to-end solution to estimate the similarity score between experts and queries. A similarity matrix is constructed using experts’ document and the query. However, such a matrix ignores word specificity, consists of detached areas, and is very sparse. In EFCNN, term weighting is naturally incorporated into the similarity matrix for word specificity and a restricted convolution is proposed to ease the sparsity. We compare EFCNN with a number of baseline models for expert finding including the traditional model and the neural model. Our EFCNN clearly achieves better performance than the comparison methods on three datasets.


Expert finding Convolution neural network Similarity matrix 


  1. 1.
    Balog, K., Azzopardi, L., De Rijke, M.: Formal models for expert finding in enterprise corpora. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 43–50. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Basu, C., Hirsh, H., Cohen, W.W., Nevill-Manning, C.: Recommending papers by mining the web (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cao, Y., Liu, J., Bao, S., Li, H.: Research on expert search at enterprise track of TREC 2005. In: TREC (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deng, H., King, I., Lyu, M.R.: Formal models for expert finding on DBLP bibliography data. In: ICDM 2008, pp. 163–172 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duchi, J.C., Hazan, E., Singer, Y.: Adaptive subgradient methods for online learning and stochastic optimization. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2121–2159 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dumais, S.T., Nielsen, J.: Automating the assignment of submitted manuscripts to reviewers. In: Proceedings of the 15th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 233–244. ACM (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hinton, G.E., Srivastava, N., Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., Salakhutdinov, R.R.: Improving neural networks by preventing co-adaptation of feature detectors. arXiv preprint arXiv:1207.0580 (2012)
  8. 8.
    Ioffe, S., Szegedy, C.: Batch normalization: accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.03167 (2015)
  9. 9.
    Järvelin, K., Kekäläinen, J.: Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. (TOIS) 20(4), 422–446 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Kusner, M., Sun, Y., I.Kolkin, N., Q.Weinberger, K.: From word embeddings to document distances. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, vol. 15, pp. 957–966 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karimzadehgan, M., Zhai, C., Belford, G.: Multi-aspect expertise matching for review assignment. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp. 1113–1122. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Le, Q., Mikolov, T.: Distributed representations of sentences and documents. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 1188–1196 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., Haffner, P.: Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc. IEEE 86(11), 2278–2324 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mikolov, T., Chen, K., Corrado, G., Dean, J.: Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781 (2013)
  15. 15.
    Mimno, D., McCallum, A.: Expertise modeling for matching papers with reviewers. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 500–509. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Palangi, H., et al.: Deep sentence embedding using long short-term memory networks: analysis and application to information retrieval. IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. (TASLP) 24(4), 694–707 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pang, L., Lan, Y., Guo, J., Xu, J., Wan, S., Cheng, X.: Text matching as image recognition. In: AAAI, pp. 2793–2799 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Petkova, D., Croft, W.B.: Hierarchical language models for expert finding in enterprise corpora. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools 17(01), 5–18 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Prechelt, L.: Automatic early stopping using cross validation: quantifying the criteria. Neural Netw. 11(4), 761–767 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Salton, G., Buckley, C.: Term-weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Inf. Process. Manag. 24(5), 513–523 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tang, J., Zhang, J., Yao, L., Li, J., Zhang, L., Su, Z.: ArnetMiner: extraction and mining of academic social networks. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 990–998. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang, J., Tang, J., Liu, L., Li, J.: A mixture model for expert finding. In: PAKDD 2008, pp. 466–478 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and TechnologyTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations