Advertisement

Learning the Preferences of News Readers with SVM and Lasso Ranking

  • Elena Hensinger
  • Ilias Flaounas
  • Nello Cristianini
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 339)

Abstract

We attack the task of predicting which news-stories are more appealing to a given audience by comparing ‘most popular stories’, gathered from various online news outlets, over a period of seven months, with stories that did not become popular despite appearing on the same page at the same time. We cast this as a learning-to-rank task, and train two different learning algorithms to reproduce the preferences of the readers, within each of the outlets. The first method is based on Support Vector Machines, the second on the Lasso. By just using words as features, SVM ranking can reach significant accuracy in correctly predicting the preference of readers for a given pair of articles. Furthermore, by exploiting the sparsity of the solutions found by the Lasso, we can also generate lists of keywords that are expected to trigger the attention of the outlets’ readers.

Keywords

Learning to Rank News Content Analysis User Preferences Support Vector Machines Lasso 

References

  1. 1.
    Gans, H.J.: Deciding What’s News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time, 25th anniversary edition edn. Northwestern University Press (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wu, F., Huberman, B.A.: Popularity, novelty and attention. In: Proceedings 9th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC 2008), pp. 240–245 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Szabó, G., Huberman, B.A.: Predicting the popularity of online content. CoRR abs/0811.0405 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ghose, A., Yang, S.: An empirical analysis of search engine advertising: Sponsored search in electronic markets. Management Science 55(10), 1605–1622 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Joachims, T.: Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. In: Proceedings of the Eighth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), pp. 133–142 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tibshirani, R.: Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological) 58(1), 267–288 (1996)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boser, B., Guyon, I., Vapnik, V.: A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers. In: Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Computational Learning Theory (COLT), pp. 144–152 (1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cristianini, N., Shawe-Taylor, J.: An introduction to support vector machines and other kernel-based learning methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Flaounas, I.N., Turchi, M., Bie, T.D., Cristianini, N.: Inference and validation of networks. In: Buntine, W., Grobelnik, M., Mladenić, D., Shawe-Taylor, J. (eds.) Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. LNCS, vol. 5781, pp. 344–358. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Porter, M.: An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program 14, 130–137 (1980)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, B.: Web Data Mining, Exploring Hyperlinks, Contents, and Usage Data. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elena Hensinger
    • 1
  • Ilias Flaounas
    • 1
  • Nello Cristianini
    • 1
  1. 1.Intelligent Systems LaboratoryUniversity of BristolUK

Personalised recommendations