Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T22:26:06.978Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Personalized information retrieval based on context and ontological knowledge

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2008

PH. MYLONAS ,
D. VALLET ,
P. CASTELLS ,
M. FERNÁNDEZ  and
Y. AVRITHIS
PH. MYLONAS
Affiliation:
National Technical University of Athens, Image, Video and Multimedia Laboratory, 9, Iroon Polytechniou street, 15773 Zographou, Athens, Greece; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
D. VALLET
Affiliation:
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Escuela Politécnica Superior, 28049 Madrid, Spain; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
P. CASTELLS
Affiliation:
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Escuela Politécnica Superior, 28049 Madrid, Spain; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
M. FERNÁNDEZ
Affiliation:
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Escuela Politécnica Superior, 28049 Madrid, Spain; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Y. AVRITHIS
Affiliation:
National Technical University of Athens, Image, Video and Multimedia Laboratory, 9, Iroon Polytechniou street, 15773 Zographou, Athens, Greece; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Context modeling has long been acknowledged as a key aspect in a wide variety of problem domains. In this paper we focus on the combination of contextualization and personalization methods to improve the performance of personalized information retrieval. The key aspects in our proposed approach are (1) the explicit distinction between historic user context and live user context, (2) the use of ontology-driven representations of the domain of discourse, as a common, enriched representational ground for content meaning, user interests, and contextual conditions, enabling the definition of effective means to relate the three of them, and (3) the introduction of fuzzy representations as an instrument to properly handle the uncertainty and imprecision involved in the automatic interpretation of meanings, user attention, and user wishes. Based on a formal grounding at the representational level, we propose methods for the automatic extraction of persistent semantic user preferences, and live, ad-hoc user interests, which are combined in order to improve the accuracy and reliability of personalization for retrieval.

Type
Articles
Information
The Knowledge Engineering Review , Volume 23 , Special Issue 1: Contexts and Ontologies , March 2008 , pp. 73 - 100
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Al-Khatib, W., Day, Y. F., Ghafoor, A. and Berra, P. B. 1999 Semantic modeling and knowledge representation in multimedia databases. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 11(1), 64–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allan, J. et al. 2002 Challenges in information retrieval and language modelling, Report of Workshop held at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. SIGIR Forum 37(1), 31–47.Google Scholar
Benkhalifa, M., Bensaid, A. and Mouradi, A. 1999 Text categorization using the semi-supervised fuzzy c-means algorithm. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of the North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society (NAFIPS 1999), New York, USA, pp. 561–565.Google Scholar
Bharat, K. 2000 SearchPad: Explicit capture of search context to support web search. In Proceedings of the 9th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW9), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 493–501.Google Scholar
Brown, P. J., Bovey, J. and Chen, X. 1997 Context-aware applications: from the laboratory to the marketplace. IEEE Personal Communications 4(5), 58–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, I. and Van Rijsbergen, C. J. 1996 The ostensive model of developing information needs. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS 1996), Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 251–268.Google Scholar
Castells, P., Fernandez, M. and Vallet, D. 2007 An adaptation of the vector-space model for ontology-based information retrieval. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 19(2), 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castells, P., Fernandez, M., Vallet, D., Mylonas, Ph. and Avrithis, Y. 2005 Self-tuning personalized information retrieval in an ontology-based framework. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Web Semantics, Agia Napa, Cyprus, Springer Verlag LNCS vol. 3762, pp. 977–986.Google Scholar
Chang, C. H. and Hsu, C. C. 1998 Integrating query expansion and conceptual relevance feedback for personalized Web information retrieval. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 30(1–7), 621–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coutaz, J., Crowley, J., Dobson, S. and Garlan, D.Context is key. Communications of the ACM 48(3), 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasiopoulou, S., Mezaris, V., Kompatsiaris, I., Papastathis, V. K. and Strintzis, M. G. 2005 Knowledge-assisted semantic video object detection. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 15(10), 1210–1224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dill, S. et al. 2003 A case for automated large scale semantic annotation. Journal of Web Semantics 1(1), 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmonds, B. 1999 The pragmatic roots of context. In Proceedings of the 2nd International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context, Trento, Italy, Springer Verlag LNAI vol. 1688, pp. 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egghe, L. and Michel, C. 2003 Construction of weak and strong similarity measures for ordered sets of documents using fuzzy set techniques. Information Processing and Management 39(5), 771–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrig, M. and Sure, Y. 2004 Ontology mapping—an integrated approach. In Proceedings of the 1st European Semantic Web Symposium (ESWS 2004), Heraklion, Greece, Springer Verlag LNCS vol. 3053, pp. 76–91.Google Scholar
Euzenat, J. 2004 Evaluating ontology alignment methods. In Proceedings of the Dagstuhl Seminar on Semantic Interoperability and Integration, Wadern, Germany, pp. 47–50.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, L., Gabrilovich, E., Matias, Y., Rivlin, E., Solan, Z., WolfmanG., G., and Ruppin, E. 2002 Placing search in context: The concept revisited. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 20(1), 116–131.Google Scholar
Gauch, S., Chaffee, J. and Pretschner, A. 2004 Ontology-based personalized search and browsing. Web Intelligence and Agent Systems 1(3–4), 219–234.Google Scholar
Haveliwala, T. H. Topic-sensitive pagerank. In Proceedings of the 11th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2002), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, pp. 517–526.Google Scholar
Heer, J., Newberger, A., Beckmann, C. and Hong, J. 2003 Liquid: context-aware distributed queries. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp 2003), Seattle, Washington, USA, pp. 140–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, J. I. and Landay, J. A. 2001 An infrastructure approach to context-aware computing. Human-Computer Interaction 16(2–4), 87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO/IEC FDIS 15938-5, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29 M 4242. 2001 Information Technology—Multimedia Content Description Interface—Part 5: Multimedia Description Schemes, pp. 442–448.Google Scholar
Jeh, G. and Widom, J. 2003 Scaling personalized web search. In Proceedings of the 12th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2003), Budapest, Hungary, pp. 271–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalfoglou, Y. and Schorlemmer, M. 2003 Ontology mapping: the state of the art. Knowledge Engineering Review 18(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, D. and Teevan, J.Implicit feedback for inferring user preference. SIGIR Forum 32(2), 18–28.Google Scholar
Kim, H. and Chan, P. 2003 Learning implicit user interest hierarchy for context in personalization. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI 2003), Miami, Florida, USA, pp. 101–108.Google Scholar
Kiryakov, A., Popov, B., Terziev, I., Manov, D. and Ognyanoff, D. 2004 Semantic annotation, indexing, and retrieval. Journal of Web Sematics 2(1), 47–49.Google Scholar
Klir, G. and Bo, Y. 1995 Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic, Theory and Applications. New Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Klyne, G., Carrol, J. J., and McBride, B. 2004 Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax, W3C Recommendation.Google Scholar
Kohavi, R. and Sommerfield, D. 1995 Feature subset selection using the wrapper model: overfitting and dynamic search space topology. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD 1995), Montréal, Canada.Google Scholar
Kraft, D. H., Bordogna, G., and Passi, G. 1998 Information retrieval systems: where is the fuzz?, In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Anchorage, Alaska, USA, pp. 1367–1372.Google Scholar
Lawrence, S. 2000 Context in web search. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 23(3), 25–32.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. 1980 Index, context, and content. In Kanger, S. and Ohman, S. (Eds.), Philosophy and Grammar, pp. 79–100, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland.Google Scholar
Liu, F., Yu, C. and Meng, W. 2004 Personalized web search for improving retrieval effectiveness. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 16(1), 28–40.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. 1993 Notes on formalizing context. In Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1993), Chambéry, France, pp. 81–98.Google Scholar
Micarelli, A. and Sciarrone, F. 2004 Anatomy and empirical evaluation of an adaptive web-based information filtering system. User Modelling and User-Adapted Interaction 14(2–3), 159–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miyamoto, S.Fuzzy Sets in Information Retrieval and Cluster Analysis. Dordrecht Boston London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mylonas, Ph. and Avrithis, Y. Context modeling for multimedia analysis and use. In Proceedings of the 5th International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context (Context 2005), Paris, France.Google Scholar
Mylonas, Ph., Wallace, M., and Kollias, S. Using k-nearest neighbor and feature selection as an improvement to hierarchical clustering. In Vouros, G. A. and Panayiotopoulos, T. (Eds.), Methods and Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Springer Verlag LNCS vol. 3025, pp. 191–200.Google Scholar
Noy, N., Semantic integration: a survey of ontology-based approaches, Sigmod Record 33(4), 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popov, B., Kiryakov, A., Ognyanoff, D., Manov, D. and Kirilov, A. 2004 KIM—A semantic platform for information extraction and retrieval. Journal of Natural Language Engineering 10(3–4), 375–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajagopalan, B. and Deshmukh, A.Evaluation of online personalization systems: a survey of evaluation schemes and a knowledge-based approach. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research 6(2), 112–122.Google Scholar
Rocchio, J. 1971 Relevance feedback information retrieval. In Salton, G. (Eds.), The Smart Retrieval System-Experiments in Automatic Document Processing, Kansas City, Missouri, USA: Prentice Hall, pp. 313–323.Google Scholar
Salton, G. and McGill, M. 1983 Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Shen, X., Tan, B., and Zhai, C. Context-sensitive information retrieval using implicit feedback. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR 2005), Salvador, Brazil, pp. 43–50.Google Scholar
Staab, S. and Studer, R. (Eds.) 2004 Handbook on Ontologies. Heidelberg, Berlin and New York:Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theodoridis, S. and Koutroumbas, K. 1998 Pattern Recognition. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA.Google Scholar
Vallet, D., Mylonas, Ph., Corella, M. A., Fuentes, J. M., Castells, P. and Avrithis, Y. 2005 A semantically-enhanced personalization framework for knowledge-driven media services. In Proceedings of IADIS International Conference on WWW / Internet (ICWI 2005), Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
van Eijck, J. 2000 On the proper treatment of context in NL. In Monachesi, P. (Ed.), Computational Linguistics in the Netherlands 1999, Selected Papers form the 10th CLIN Meeting, Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
White, R. W., Jose, J. M., van Rijsbergen, C. J. and Ruthven, I. 2004 A simulated study of implicit feedback models. In Proceedings of the 26th European Conference on Information retrieval (ECIR 2004), Sunderland, UK, Springer Verlag LNCS vol. 2997, pp. 311–326.Google Scholar
Wiebe, J., Hirst, G., and Horton, D.Language use in context. Communications of the ACM 39(1), 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, R. and Wu, M. 2004 Evaluation experiments and experience from the perspective of interactive information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Empirical Evaluation of Adaptive Systems, in Conjunction with the 2nd International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, pp. 221–230.Google Scholar
Zadeh, L. 1965 Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 8, 338–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar