Advertisement

Personalization on a Peer-to-Peer Television System

  • Jun Wang
  • Johan Pouwelse
  • Jenneke Fokker
  • Arjen P. de Vries
  • Marcel J.T. Reinders
Chapter

Abstract

Television signals have been broadcast around the world for many decades. More flexibility was introduced with the arrival of the VCR. PVR (personal video recorder) devices such as the TiVo further enhanced the television experience. A PVR enables people to watch television programs they like without the restrictions of broadcast schedules. However, a PVR has limited recording capacity and can only record programs that are available on the local cable system or satellite receiver. This paper presents a prototype system that goes beyond the existing VCR, PVR, and VoD (Video on Demand) solutions. We believe that amongst others broadband, P2P, and recommendation technology will drastically change the television broadcasting as it exists today. Our operational prototype system called Tribler [Pouwelse et al., 2006] gives people access to all television stations in the world. By exploiting P2P technology, we have created a distribution system for live television as well as sharing of programs recorded days or months ago.

Keywords

Recommender System User Profile Distribute Hash Table User Interest Similar User 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Ali, K. & van Stam, W., (2004). TiVo: Making Show Recommendations Using a Distributed Collaborative Filtering Architecture. International ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ardissono, L., Kobsa, A., & Maybury, M. (Ed). (2004). Personalized Digital Television. Targeting programs to individual users. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Breese, J. S., Heckerman, D., & Kadie, C., (1998). Empirical Analysis of Predictive Algorithms for Collaborative Filtering. Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Claypool, M., Waseda, M., Le, P., & Brow, D. C., (2001). Implicit interest indicators. International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deshpande, M. & Karypis, G. (2004). Item-based top-n recommendation algorithms. ACM Transactions on Information Systems. Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eugster, P.T., Guerraoui, R., Kermarrec, A.M., & Massoulie, L. (2004), From epidemics to distributed computing, IEEE Computer. 21(3):341–374.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eyheramendy, S., Lewis, D., & Madigan. D. (2003). On the naive bayes model for text categorization. In Proc. of Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fokker, J.E. & De Ridder, H. (2005). Technical Report on the Human Side of Cooperating in Decentralized Networks. Internal report I-Share Deliverable 1.2, Delft University of Technology. http://www.cs.vu.nl/ishare/public/I-Share-D1.2.pdf
  9. 9.
    Hofmann, T. (2004). Latent Semantic Models for Collaborative Filtering. ACM Transactions on Information Systems.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herlocker, J.L., Konstan, J.A., Borchers, A., & Riedl J. (1999). An algorithmic framework for performing collaborative filtering. International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research Development on Information Retrieval. Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hull. D. (1993). Using statistical testing in the evalution of retrieval experiments. International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research Development on Information Retrieval. Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jelasity, M & van Steen, M. (2002). Large-Scale Newscast Computing on the Internet. Internal report IR-503, Vrije Universiteit, Department of Computer Science.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lafferty, J., & Zhai, C. (2003). Probabilistic relevance models based on document and query generation. In W. B. Croft and J. Lafferty, editors, Language Modeling and Information Retrieval. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Linden G., Smith, B., & York J. (2003). Amazon. com recommendations: item-to-item collaborative filtering. IEEE Internet Computing. Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Linden G., Smith, B., & York J. (2003). Amazon. com recommendations: item-to-item collaborative filtering. IEEE Internet Computing. Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marlin B. (2004). Collaborative filtering: a machine learning perspective. Master’s thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Miller, B.M., Konstan, J.A., & Riedl, J. (2004) PocketLens: Toward a Personal Recommender System. ACM Transactions on Information Systems. Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nichols, D. (1998). Implicit rating and filtering. In Proceedings of 5 th DELOS Workshop on Filtering and Collaborative Filtering, pages 31–36, ERCIM.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pouwelse, J. A., Garbacki, P., Wang, J., Bakker, A., Yang, J., Iosup, A., Epema, D.H.J, Reinders, M.J.T van Steen, M., & Sips, H.J. (2005). Tribler: A social-based Peer-to-Peer system. International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS’06). Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sarwar, B., Karypis, G., Konstan, J., & Riedl, J. (2001). Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. International World Wide Web Conference.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang, J., de Vries, A.P., & Reinders, M.J.T, (2005a). A User-Item Relevance Model for Log-based Collaborative Filtering. European Conference on Information Retrieval.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang, J., de Vries, A.P., & Reinders, M.J.T, (2006b). Unifying User-based and Item-based Collaborative Filtering by Similarity Fusion. International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research Development on Information Retrieval. Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang, J., Pouwelse, J., Lagendijk, R., & Reinders, M.J.T, (2006c). Distributed Collaborative Filtering for Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Systems, ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Xue, G, Lin, C., Yang, Q., Xi, W., Zeng, H., Yu, Y., & Chen. Z. (2005). Scalable Collaborative Filtering Using Cluster-based Smoothing. International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research Development on Information Retrieval. Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhai. C., & Lafferty. J. (2001). A Study of Smoothing Methods for Language Models Applied to Ad Hoc Information Retrieval. International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research Development on Information Retrieval. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jun Wang
    • 1
  • Johan Pouwelse
    • 1
  • Jenneke Fokker
    • 2
  • Arjen P. de Vries
    • 3
  • Marcel J.T. Reinders
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer ScienceDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Faculty of Industrial Design EngineeringDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  3. 3.CWIAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations