Cost optimization based on influence and user preference

  • Jianye YangEmail author
  • Ying Zhang
  • Wenjie Zhang
  • Xuemin Lin
Regular Paper


The popularity of e-business and preference learning techniques have contributed a huge amount of product and user preference data. Analyzing the influence of an existing or new product among the users is critical to unlock the great scientific and social–economic value of these data. In this paper, we advocate the problem of influence-based cost optimization for the user preference and product data, which is fundamental in many real applications such as marketing and advertising. Generally, we aim to find a cost optimal position for a new product such that it can attract at least k or a particular percentage of users for the given user preference functions and competitors’ products. Although we show the solution space of our problem can be reduced to a finite number of possible positions (points) by utilizing the classical k-level computation techniques, the computation cost is still very expensive due to the nature of the high combinatorial complexity of the k-level problem. To alleviate this issue, we develop efficient pruning and query processing techniques to significantly improve the performance. In particular, our traverse-based 2-dimensional algorithm is very efficient with time complexity O(n) where n is the number of user preference functions. For general multi-dimensional spaces, we develop space partition-based algorithm to significantly improve the performance by utilizing cost-based, influence-based and local dominance-based pruning techniques. Then, we show that the performance of the partition-based algorithm can be further enhanced by utilizing sampling approach, where the problem can be reduced to the classical half-space intersection problem. Based on the problem of influence-based cost optimization, two naturally extended problems are proposed, which are Batch-Query and the most cost-effective influence query. We demonstrate the efficiency of our techniques with extensive experiments over real and synthetic datasets.


User preference Cost optimization k-level computation 



  1. 1.
    Qian L, Gao J, Jagadish H (2015) Learning user preferences by adaptive pairwise comparison. In: PVLDB, pp 1322–1333Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vlachou A, Doulkeridis C, Nørvåg K, Kotidis Y (2010) Identifying the most influential data objects with reverse top-k queries. In: PVLDB, pp 364–372Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arvanitis A, Deligiannakis A, Vassiliou Y (2012) Efficient influence-based processing of market research queries. In: CIKM, pp 1193–1202Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lin CY, Koh JL, Chen AL (2013) Determining k-most demanding products with maximum expected number of total customers. TKDE 25(8):1732–1747Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Peng P, Wong RCW (2015) k-hit query: top-k query with probabilistic utility function. In: SIGMOD, pp 577–592Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gao Y, Liu Q, Chen G, Zheng B, Zhou L (2015) Answering why-not questions on reverse top-k queries. In: PVLDB, pp 738–749Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vlachou A, Doulkeridis C, Kotidis Y, Nørvåg K (2010) Reverse top-k queries. In: ICDE, pp 365–376Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ge S, Mamoulis N, Cheung DW et al (2013) Efficient all top-k computation-a unified solution for all top-k, reverse top-k and top-m influential queries. TKDE 25(5):1015–1027Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vlachou A, Doulkeridis C, Nørvåg K, Kotidis Y (2013) Branch-and-bound algorithm for reverse top-k queries. In: SIGMOD, pp 481–492Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cheema MA, Shen Z, Lin X, Zhang W (2014) A unified framework for efficiently processing ranking related queries. In: EDBT, pp 427–438Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Koh JL, Lin CY, Chen AL (2014) Finding k most favorite products based on reverse top-t queries. VLDBJ 23(4):541–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mulmuley K (1991) On levels in arrangements and Voronoi diagrams. Discrete Comput Geom 6(1):307–338MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Agarwal PK, De Berg M, Matousek J, Schwarzkopf O (1998) Constructing levels in arrangements and higher order Voronoi diagrams. SIAM J Comput 27(3):654–667MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Agarwal PK, Aronov B, Chan TM, Sharir M (1998) On levels in arrangements of lines, segments, planes, and triangles. Discrete Comput Geom 19(3):315–331MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yang J, Zhang Y, Zhang W, Lin X (2016) Influence based cost optimization on user preference. In: ICDE, pp 709–720Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gkorgkas O, Vlachou A, Doulkeridis C, Nørvåg K (2015) Finding the most diverse products using preference queries. In: EDBT, pp 205–216Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang S, Cheema MA, Zhang Y, Lin X (2015) Selecting representative objects considering coverage and diversity. In: GeoRich, pp 31–38Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lu H, Jensen CS (2012) Upgrading uncompetitive products economically. In: ICDE, pp 977–988Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ge S, Mamoulis N, Cheung DW et al (2015) Dominance relationship analysis with budget constraints. Knowl Inf Syst 42:409–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wan Q, Wong RCW, Ilyas IF, Özsu MT, Peng Y (2009) Creating competitive products. In: PVLDB, pp 898–909Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wan Q, Wong RCW, Peng Y (2011) Finding top-k profitable products. In: ICDE, pp 1055–1066Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li C, Ooi BC, Tung AK, Wang S (2006) Dada: a data cube for dominant relationship analysis. In: SIGMOD, pp 659–670Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dey TK (1998) Improved bounds for planar k-sets and related problems. Discrete Comput Geom 19(3):373–382MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Clarkson KL, Shor PW (1989) Applications of random sampling in computational geometry, ii. Discrete Comput Geom 4(1):387–421MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Das G, Gunopulos D, Koudas N, Sarkas N (2007) Ad-hoc top-k query answering for data streams. In: PVLDB, pp 183–194Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yu A, Agarwal PK, Yang J (2012) Processing a large number of continuous preference top-k queries. In: SIGMOD, pp 397–408Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Edelsbrunner H, O’Rourke J, Seidel R (1986) Constructing arrangements of lines and hyperplanes with applications. SIAM J Comput 15(2):341–363MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chabrillac Y, Crouzeix JP (1987) Continuity and differentiability properties of monotone real functions of several real variables. In: Cornet B, Nguyen VH, Vial JP (eds) Nonlinear analysis and optimization. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–16zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Clarkson KL, Shor PW (1988) Algorithms for diametral pairs and convex hulls that are optimal, randomized, and incremental. In: SCG, ACM, pp 12–17Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chang YC, Bergman L, Castelli V, Li CS, Lo ML, Smith JR (2000) The onion technique: indexing for linear optimization queries. In: SIGMOD, pp 391–402Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Preparata FP, Shamos MI (1985) Computational geometry: an introduction. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jianye Yang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ying Zhang
    • 2
  • Wenjie Zhang
    • 3
  • Xuemin Lin
    • 3
  1. 1.Alibaba GroupHangzhouChina
  2. 2.University of Technology, Sydney (UTS)SydneyAustralia
  3. 3.School of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations