A Paper Recommendation System with ReaderBench: The Graphical Visualization of Semantically Related Papers and Concepts

  • Ionut Cristian Paraschiv
  • Mihai Dascalu
  • Philippe Dessus
  • Stefan Trausan-Matu
  • Danielle S. McNamara
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Educational Technology book series (LNET)


The task of tagging papers with semantic metadata in order to analyze their relatedness represents a good foundation for a paper recommender system. The analysis from this paper extends from previous research in order to create a graph of papers from a specific domain with the purpose of determining each article’s importance within the considered corpus of papers. Moreover, as non-latent representations are powerful when used in conjunction with latent ones, our system retrieves semantically close words, not present in the paper, in order to improve the retrieval of papers. Our previous analyses used the semantic representation of papers in different semantic models with the purpose of creating visual graphs based on the semantic relatedness links between the abstracts. The current analysis takes a step forward by proposing a model that can suggest which papers are of the highest relevance, share similar concepts, and are semantically related with the initial query. Our study is performed using paper abstracts in the field of information technology extracted from the Web of Science citation index. The research includes a use case and its corresponding results by using interactive and exploratory network graph representations.


Paper recommendation system Scientometrics Semantic similarity Discourse analysis 



The work presented in this paper was partially funded by the FP7 2008-212578 LTfLL project, by the Sectorial Operational Programme Human Resources Development 2007–2013 of the Ministry of European Funds through the Financial Agreement POSDRU/159/1.5/S/134398, as well as by the NSF grants 1417997 and 1418378 to Arizona State University. We also thank Pablo Jensen and Sebastian Grauwin for providing the initial corpus of paper abstracts, and we are grateful to Cecile Perret for her help in preparing this paper.


  1. 1.
    Joeran, B., Langer, S., Genzmehr, M., Gipp, B., Breitinger, C., & Nürnberger, A. (2013). Research paper recommender system evaluation: A quantitative literature survey. In Workshop on Reproducibility and Replication in Recommender Systems Evaluation (RepSys) at the ACM Recommender System Conference (RecSys’13). Hong Kong, China: ACM.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2008). Introduction to information retrieval (Vol. 1). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boyack, K. W., & Klavans, R. (2010). Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2389–2404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sword, H. (2012). Stylish academic writing. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gipp, B., Beel, J., & Hentschel, C. (2009). Scienstein: A research paper recommender system. In International Conference on Emerging Trends in Computing (ICETiC’09) (pp. 309–315). Virudhunagar, India.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deerwester, S., Dumais, S. T., Landauer, T. K., Furnas, G. W., & Beck, L. (1988). Improving information retrieval with latent semantic indexing. In 51st Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science 25 (pp. 36–40).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dascalu, M. (2014). Analyzing discourse and text complexity for learning and collaborating, studies in computational intelligence (Vol. 534). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2), 211–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3(4–5), 993–1022.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Budanitsky, A., & Hirst, G. (2006). Evaluating wordnet-based measures of lexical semantic relatedness. Computational Linguistics, 32(1), 13–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paraschiv, I. C., Dascalu, M., Trausan-Matu, S., & Dessus, P. (2015). Analyzing the semantic relatedness of paper abstracts—an application to the educational research field. In 2nd International Workshop on Design and Spontaneity in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (DS-CSCL-2015), in conjunction with the 20th International Conference on Control Systems and Computer Science (CSCS20) (pp. 759–764). Bucharest, Romania: IEEE.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dascalu, M., Dessus, P., Bianco, M., Trausan-Matu, S., & Nardy, A. (2014). Mining texts, learners productions and strategies with ReaderBench. In A. Peña-Ayala (Ed.), Educational data mining: Applications and trends (pp. 335–377). Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2008). Speech and language processing: An introduction to natural language processing, speech recognition, and computational linguistics. London: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009). Gephi: An open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 361–362). San Jose, CA: AAAI Press.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grauwin, S., & Jensen, P. (2011). Mapping scientific institutions. Scientometrics, 89, 943.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ionut Cristian Paraschiv
    • 1
  • Mihai Dascalu
    • 1
  • Philippe Dessus
    • 2
  • Stefan Trausan-Matu
    • 1
  • Danielle S. McNamara
    • 3
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentUniversity Politehnica of BucharestBucharestRomania
  2. 2.LSEUniversité Grenoble AlpesGrenobleFrance
  3. 3.LSIArizona State UniversityArizonaUSA

Personalised recommendations