Exploring versus exploiting when learning user models for text recommendation

被引:32
作者
Balabanovic, M [1 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Dept Comp Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
recommender systems; information filtering; user modeling; relevance feedback; Selective Dissemination of Information; machine learning; adaptive information retrieval;
D O I
10.1023/A:1008205606173
中图分类号
TP3 [计算技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
The text recommendation task involves delivering sets of documents to users on the basis of user models. These models are improved over time, given feedback on the delivered documents. When selecting documents to recommend, a system faces an instance of the exploration/exploitation tradeoff. whether to deliver documents about which there is little certainty, or those which are known to match the user model learned so far. In this paper, a simulation is constructed to investigate the effects of this tradeoff on the rate of learning user models, and the resulting compositions of the sets of recommended documents, in particular World-Wide Web pages. Document selection strategies are developed which correspond to different points along the tradeoff. Using an exploitative strategy, our results show that simple preference functions can successfully be learned using a vector-space representation of a user model in conjunction with a gradient descent algorithm, but that increasingly complex preference functions lead to a slowing down of the learning process. Exploratory strategies are shown to increase the rate of user model acquisition at the expense of presenting users with suboptimal recommendations; in addition they adapt to user preference changes more rapidly than exploitative strategies. These simulated tests suggest an implementation for a simple control that is exposed to users, allowing them to vary a system's document selection behavior depending on individual circumstances.
引用
收藏
页码:71 / 102
页数:32
相关论文
共 60 条
[31]   Feature selection, perceptron learning, and a usability case study for text categorization [J].
Ng, HT ;
Goh, WB ;
Low, KL .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 20TH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL ACM SIGIR CONFERENCE ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN INFORMATION RETRIEVAL, 1997, :67-73
[32]   The state of the art in text filtering [J].
Oard, DW .
USER MODELING AND USER-ADAPTED INTERACTION, 1997, 7 (03) :141-178
[33]  
PAZZANI M, 1996, P 13 NAT C ART INT P
[34]   AN ALGORITHM FOR SUFFIX STRIPPING [J].
PORTER, MF .
PROGRAM-AUTOMATED LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 1980, 14 (03) :130-137
[35]   Recommender systems [J].
Resnick, P ;
Varian, HR .
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 1997, 40 (03) :56-58
[36]  
Rich Elaine, 1979, Cognitive Science, V3, P329, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0364-0213
[37]  
Roberts F. S., 1979, MEASUREMENT THEORY
[38]   RELEVANCE WEIGHTING OF SEARCH TERMS [J].
ROBERTSON, SE ;
SPARCK-JONES, K .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, 1976, 27 (03) :129-146
[39]   PROBABILITY RANKING PRINCIPLE IN IR [J].
ROBERTSON, SE .
JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, 1977, 33 (04) :294-304
[40]  
Rocchio J. J., 1971, RELEVANCE FEEDBACK I