skip to main content
10.1145/1502650.1502666acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Learning to recognize valuable tags

Authors Info & Claims
Published:08 February 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many websites use tags as a mechanism for improving item metadata through collective user effort. Users of tagging systems often apply far more tags to an item than a system can display. These tags can range in quality from tags that capture a key facet of an item, to those that are subjective, irrelevant, or misleading. In this paper we explore tag selection algorithms that choose the tags that sites display. Based on 225,000 ratings and survey responses, we conduct offline analyses of 21 tag selection algorithms. We select the three best performing algorithms from our offline analysis, and deploy them live on the MovieLens website to 5,695 users for three months. Based on our results, we offer tagging system designers advice about tag selection algorithms.

References

  1. M. Ames and M. Naaman. Why we tag: motivations for annotation in mobile and online media. In CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 971--980, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Arnt and S. Zilberstein. Learning to perform moderation in online forums. Web Intelligence, 2003. WI 2003. Proceedings. IEEE/WIC International Conference on, pages 637--641, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. M. Balabanovic and Y. Shoham. Content-based, collaborative recommendation. Communications of the ACM, 40(3):66--72, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. Besag and P. J. Green. Spatial statistics and bayesian computation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 55(1):25--37, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. V. Bouthors and O. Dedieu. Pharos, a collaborative infrastructure for web knowledge sharing. In ECDL, pages 215--233, London, UK, 1999. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. B. P. Carlin and T. A. Louis. Bayes and empirical bayes methods for data analysis. Statistics and Computing, 7(2):153--154, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. C. Cattuto, V. Loreto, and L. Pietronero. Semiotic dynamics in online social communities. In The European Physical Journal C (accepted). Springer-Verlag, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. D. Cosley, D. Frankowski, S. Kiesler, L. Terveen, and J. Riedl. How oversight improves member-maintained communities. In Proceedings of CHI 2005, pages 11--20, New York, NY, 2005. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. D. Cosley, D. Frankowski, L. Terveen, and J. Riedl. Using intelligent task routing and contribution review to help communities build artifacts of lasting value. In Proceedings of ACM CHI, Montreal, CA, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. A. Gelman, J. B. Carlin, H. S. Stern, and D. B. Rubin. Bayesian Data Analysis, Second Edition. Chapman & Hall/CRC, July 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. N. Glance, D. Arregui, and M. Dardenne. Knowledge pump: Supporting the flow and use of knowledge. In Information Technology for Knowledge Management. Springer-Verlag, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. S. Golder and B. A. Huberman. The structure of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science (accepted), 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. Herlocker, J. Konstan, L. Terveen, and J. Riedl. Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 22(1):5--53, Jan. 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. T. Joachims. Training linear svms in linear time. In KDD '06: Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 217--226, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. C. Lampe and P. Resnick. Slash (dot) and Burn: Distributed Moderation in a Large Online Conversation Space. Proceedings of SIGCHI, pages 543--550. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. G. MacGregor and E. McCulloch. Collaborative tagging as a knowledge organisation and resource discovery tool. Library View (accepted), 55(5), 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. M. M. Markus Weimer, Iryna Gurevych. Automatically assesing the post quality in online discussions on software. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. D. Millen, J. Feinberg, and B. Kerr. Social bookmarking in the enterprise. ACM Queue, 3(9):28--35, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. S. Sen, F. M. Harper, A. LaPitz, and J. Riedl. The quest for quality tags. In GROUP '07: Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on Supporting group work, pages 361--370, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. S. Sen, S. K. Lam, A. M. Rashid, D. Cosley, D. Frankowski, J. Osterhouse, F. M. Harper, and J. Riedl. tagging, communities, vocabulary, evolution. In Proceedings of the ACM 2006 Conference on CSCW, Ban, Alberta, Canada, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Learning to recognize valuable tags

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IUI '09: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces
        February 2009
        522 pages
        ISBN:9781605581682
        DOI:10.1145/1502650

        Copyright © 2009 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 8 February 2009

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate683of2,684submissions,25%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader