Skip to main content

Finding Relevant Tweets

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 7418))

Abstract

When a user of a microblogging site authors a microblog post or browses through a microblog post, it provides cues as to what topic she is interested in at that point in time. Example-based search that retrieves similar tweets given one exemplary tweet, such as the one just authored, can help provide the user with relevant content. We investigate various components of microblog posts, such as the associated timestamp, author’s social network, and the content of the post, and develop approaches that harness such factors in finding relevant tweets given a query tweet. An empirical analysis of such techniques on real world twitter-data is then presented to quantify the utility of the various factors in assessing tweet relevance. We observe that content-wise similar tweets that also contain extra information not already present in the query, are perceived as useful. We then develop a composite technique that combines the various approaches by scoring tweets using a dynamic query-specific linear combination of separate techniques. An empirical evaluation establishes the effectiveness of the composite technique, and that it outperforms each of its constituents.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Sakaki, T., Okazaki, M., Matsuo, Y.: Earthquake shakes twitter users: real-time event detection by social sensors. In: WWW, pp. 851–860 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wu, S., Hofman, J.M., Mason, W.A., Watts, D.J.: Who says what to whom on twitter. In: WWW, pp. 705–714. ACM, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Deshpande, P.M., Deepak, P., Kummamuru, K.: Efficient online top-k retrieval with arbitrary similarity measures. In: EDBT, pp. 356–367 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Krinke, J.: Identifying similar code with program dependence graphs. In: WCRE, p. 301. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Subramaniam, L.V., Roy, S., Faruquie, T.A., Negi, S.: A survey of types of text noise and techniques to handle noisy text. In: AND, pp. 115–122 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Allison, B., Guthrie, D., Guthrie, L.: Another Look at the Data Sparsity Problem. In: Sojka, P., Kopeček, I., Pala, K. (eds.) TSD 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4188, pp. 327–334. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Steinbach, M., Karypis, G., Kumar, V.: A comparison of document clustering techniques. In: KDD Workshop on Text Mining (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Levenshtein, V.I.: Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Technical Report 8 (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Wang, W., Xiao, C., Lin, X., Zhang, C.: Efficient approximate entity extraction with edit distance constraints. In: SIGMOD, pp. 759–770 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sanderson, M., Croft, W.B.: Deriving concept hierarchies from text. In: SIGIR, pp. 206–213 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Xue, X., Jeon, J., Croft, W.B.: Retrieval models for question and answer archives. In: SIGIR, pp. 475–482 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pedersen, T., Patwardhan, S., Michelizzi, J.: Wordnet: Similarity - measuring the relatedness of concepts. In: AAAI, pp. 1024–1025 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Banerjee, S., Pedersen, T.: An Adapted Lesk Algorithm for Word Sense Disambiguation Using WordNet. In: Gelbukh, A. (ed.) CICLing 2002. LNCS, vol. 2276, pp. 136–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Robertson, S., Zaragoza, H.: On rank-based effectiveness measures and optimization. Inf. Retr. 10, 321–339 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Smucker, M.D., Allan, J., Carterette, B.: A comparison of statistical significance tests for information retrieval evaluation. In: Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM, pp. 623–632 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Uysal, I., Croft, W.B.: User oriented tweet ranking: a filtering approach to microblogs. In: CIKM, pp. 2261–2264 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Duan, Y., Jiang, L., Qin, T., Zhou, M., Shum, H.Y.: An empirical study on learning to rank of tweets. In: COLING, pp. 295–303 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. De Choudhury, M., Counts, S., Czerwinski, M.: Identifying relevant social media content: leveraging information diversity and user cognition. In: HT (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sarma, A.D., Sarma, A.D., Gollapudi, S., Panigrahy, R.: Ranking mechanisms in twitter-like forums. In: WSDM, pp. 21–30 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Chen, J., Nairn, R., Nelson, L., Bernstein, M.S., Chi, E.H.: Short and tweet: experiments on recommending content from information streams. In: CHI (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Phelan, O., McCarthy, K., Smyth, B.: Using twitter to recommend real-time topical news. In: RecSys, pp. 385–388. ACM, New York (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Pennacchiotti, M., Gurumurthy, S.: Investigating topic models for social media user recommendation. In: WWW (Companion Volume), pp. 101–102 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Diaz, F., Metzler, D., Amer-Yahia, S.: Relevance and ranking in online dating systems. In: SIGIR, pp. 66–73. ACM, New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hannon, J., Bennett, M., Smyth, B.: Recommending twitter users to follow using content and collaborative filtering approaches. In: RecSys, pp. 199–206 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Guy, I., Jacovi, M., Perer, A., Ronen, I., Uziel, E.: Same places, same things, same people?: mining user similarity on social media. In: CSCW, pp. 41–50 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lee, M.-J., Chung, C.-W.: A User Similarity Calculation Based on the Location for Social Network Services. In: Yu, J.X., Kim, M.H., Unland, R. (eds.) DASFAA 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6587, pp. 38–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Ding, Y., Li, X., Orlowska, M.E.: Recency-based collaborative filtering. In: Proceedings of the 17th Australasian Database Conference, ADC, vol. 49, pp. 99–107 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

P., D., Chakraborti, S. (2012). Finding Relevant Tweets. In: Gao, H., Lim, L., Wang, W., Li, C., Chen, L. (eds) Web-Age Information Management. WAIM 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7418. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32281-5_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32281-5_23

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-32280-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-32281-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics