Advertisement

Network-Centric Evaluation

  • Òscar CelmaEmail author
Chapter
  • 2k Downloads

Abstract

In this chapter we present the network-centric evaluation approach. This method analyses the similarity network, created using any recommendation algorithm. Network-centric evaluation uses complex networks analysis to characterise the item collection. Also, we can combine the results from the network analysis with the popularity of the items, using the Long Tail model.

Keywords

Recommender System User Similarity Recommendation Algorithm Head Part Popular Item 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P. Cano, M. Koppenberger, and N. Wack, “An industrial-strength content-based music recommendation system,” in Proceedings of 28th International ACM SIGIR Conference, (Salvador, Brazil), 2005.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. J. Watts and S. H. Strogatz, “Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks,” Nature, vol. 393, pp. 440–442, June 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. M. Kleinberg, “Navigation in a small world,” Nature, vol. 406, p. 845, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. E. J. Newman, “The structure and function of complex networks,” SIAM Review, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 167–256, 2003.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Clauset, C. R. Shalizi and M. E. J. Newman, “Power-law distributions in empirical data,” SIAM Reviews, June 2007.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A.-L. Barabási, R. Albert, H. Jeong, and G. Bianconi, “Power-law distribution of the world wide web,” Science, vol. 287, p. 2115a, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. L. Barabási and R. Albert, “Emergence of scaling in random networks,” Science, vol. 286, pp. 509–512, October 1999.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Sordo, O. Celma, M. Blech, and E. Guaus, “The quest for musical genres: Do the experts and the wisdom of crowds agree?” in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Music Information Retrieval, (Philadelphia, PA), 2008.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Jacobson and M. Sandler, “Musically meaningful or just noise? an analysis of on-line artist networks,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Computer Music Modeling and Retrieval, (Copenhagen, Denmark), 2008.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Meyn and R. L. Tweedie, Markov Chains and Stochastic Stability. London: Springer, 1993.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Salganik, P. S. Dodds, and D. J. Watts, “Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market,” Science, vol. 311, pp. 854–856, February 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Ravasz and A. L. Barabási, “Hierarchical organization in complex networks,” Physical Review. E, Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, vol. 67, February 2003.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. M. McNee, J. Riedl, and J. A. Konstan, “Being accurate is not enough: how accuracy metrics have hurt recommender systems,” in Computer Human Interaction. Human Factors in Computing Systems, (New York, NY), pp. 1097–1101, ACM, 2006.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BMATBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations