Interest Representation, Enrichment, Dynamics, and Propagation: A Study of the Synergetic Effect of Different User Modeling Dimensions for Personalized Recommendations on Twitter

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10024)

Abstract

Microblogging services such as Twitter have been widely adopted due to the highly social nature of interactions they have facilitated. With the rich information generated by users on these services, user modeling aims to acquire knowledge about a user’s interests, which is a fundamental step towards personalization as well as recommendations. To this end, researchers have explored different dimensions such as (1) Interest Representation, (2) Content Enrichment, (3) Temporal Dynamics of user interests, and (4) Interest Propagation using semantic information from a knowledge base such as DBpedia. However, those dimensions of user modeling have largely been studied separately, and there is a lack of research on the synergetic effect of those dimensions for user modeling. In this paper, we address this research gap by investigating 16 different user modeling strategies produced by various combinations of those dimensions. Different user modeling strategies are evaluated in the context of a personalized link recommender system on Twitter. Results show that Interest Representation and Content Enrichment play crucial roles in user modeling, followed by Temporal Dynamics. The user modeling strategy considering Interest Representation, Content Enrichment and Temporal Dynamics provides the best performance among the 16 strategies. On the other hand, Interest Propagation has little effect on user modeling in the case of leveraging a rich Interest Representation or considering Content Enrichment.

References

  1. 1.
    Abdel-Hafez, A., Xu, Y.: A survey of user modelling in social media websites. Comput. Inf. Sci. 6(4), 59 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abel, F., Gao, Q., Houben, G.J., Tao, K.: Analyzing temporal dynamics in Twitter profiles for personalized recommendations in the social web. In: Proceedings of 3rd International Web Science Conference, p. 2. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abel, F., Gao, Q., Houben, G.-J., Tao, K.: Analyzing user modeling on Twitter for personalized news recommendations. In: Konstan, J.A., Conejo, R., Marzo, J.L., Oliver, N. (eds.) UMAP 2011. LNCS, vol. 6787, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abel, F., Gao, Q., Houben, G.-J., Tao, K.: Semantic enrichment of Twitter posts for user profile construction on the social web. In: Antoniou, G., Grobelnik, M., Simperl, E., Parsia, B., Plexousakis, D., De Leenheer, P., Pan, J. (eds.) ESWC 2011, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6644, pp. 375–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abel, F., Hauff, C., Houben, G.-J., Tao, K.: Leveraging user modeling on the social web with linked data. In: Brambilla, M., Tokuda, T., Tolksdorf, R. (eds.) ICWE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7387, pp. 378–385. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ahmed, A., Low, Y., Aly, M., Josifovski, V., Smola, A.J.: Scalable distributed inference of dynamic user interests for behavioral targeting. In: Proceedings of 17th International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 114–122. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Budak, C., Kannan, A., Agrawal, R., Pedersen, J.: Inferring user interests from microblogs. Technical report (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Degemmis, M., Lops, P., Semeraro, G.: A content-collaborative recommender that exploits WordNet-based user profiles for neighborhood formation. User Model. User-Adap. Inter. 17(3), 217–255 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gauch, S., Speretta, M., Chandramouli, A., Micarelli, A.: User profiles for personalized information access. In: Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A., Nejdl, W. (eds.) The Adaptive Web. LNCS, vol. 4321, pp. 54–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72079-9_2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harvey, M., Crestani, F., Carman, M.J.: Building user profiles from topic models for personalised search. In: Proceedings of 22nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp. 2309–2314 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jain, P., Kumaraguru, P., Joshi, A.: @i seek ‘fb.me’: identifying users across multiple online social networks. In: Proceedings of 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web companion, pp. 1259–1268. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kapanipathi, P., Jain, P., Venkataramani, C., Sheth, A.: User interests identification on Twitter using a hierarchical knowledge base. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 99–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kinsella, S., Wang, M., Breslin, J.G., Hayes, C.: Improving categorisation in social media using hyperlinks to structured data sources. In: Antoniou, G., Grobelnik, M., Simperl, E., Parsia, B., Plexousakis, D., De Leenheer, P., Pan, J. (eds.) ESWC 2011, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6644, pp. 390–404. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Locke, B.W.: Named entity recognition: adapting to microblogging. Ph.D. thesis (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lu, C., Lam, W., Zhang, Y.: Twitter user modeling and tweets recommendation based on Wikipedia concept graph. In: Workshops at the Twenty-Sixth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Michelson, M., Macskassy, S.A.: Discovering users’ topics of interest on Twitter: a first look. In: Proceedings of Fourth Workshop on Analytics for Noisy Unstructured Text Data, pp. 73–80. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mislove, A., Viswanath, B., Gummadi, K.P., Druschel, P.: You are who you know: inferring user profiles in online social networks. In: Proceedings of Third ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, pp. 251–260. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nishioka, C., Scherp, A.: Profiling vs. time vs. content: what does matter for top-k publication recommendation based on Twitter profiles? In: Proceedings of 16th ACM/IEEE-CS on Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, JCDL 2016, pp. 171–180. ACM, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Orlandi, F., Breslin, J., Passant, A.: Aggregated, interoperable and multi-domain user profiles for the social web. In: Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Semantic Systems, pp. 41–48. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Piao, G.: Towards comprehensive user modeling on the social web for personalized link recommendations. In: Proceedings of 2016 Conference on User Modeling Adaptation and Personalization, UMAP 2016, pp. 333–336. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Piao, G.: User modeling on Twitter with WordNet Synsets and DBpedia concepts for personalized recommendations. In: The 25th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Piao, G., Breslin, J.G.: Analyzing aggregated semantics-enabled user modeling on Google+ and Twitter for personalized link recommendations. In: User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization, pp. 105–109. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Piao, G., Breslin, J.G.: Exploring dynamics and semantics of user interests for user modeling on Twitter for link recommendations. In: 12th International Conference on Semantic Systems, pp. 81–88. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zarrinkalam, F., Kahani, M.: Semantics-enabled user interest detection from Twitter. In: 2015 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Insight Centre for Data Analytics, NUI GalwayGalwayIreland

Personalised recommendations