skip to main content
10.1145/3057148.3057151acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesswmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Effectively identifying users' research interests for scholarly reference management and discovery

Published:10 February 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Discovering users' interests is essential in order to help them explore resources in large digital repositories. In particular, correctly identifying users' interests is commonly a good approach for organising information and providing personalised recommendations. We consider here the case of discovering users' research interests in Mendeley a research platform for scholarly article management and discovery. Prior work in this area has considered approaches such as matrix factorisation and text-based topic modelling for inferring topics of interest in recommendation scenarios. These approaches present several problems, such as little or no interpretability of the inferred topics and difficulty handling similarities in vocabulary in different research disciplines. We present an effective solution for extracting coherent and interpretable research topics that leverages the reference management data in Mendeley in a three-step approach: 1) a topic model based on the interactions between users and articles rather than article content, 2) keyword extraction to label the topics using article titles and author-declared keywords and 3) identifying the research interests of users based on the articles that they have added to their libraries. An evaluation comprised of a research interest prediction task and an article recommendation task shows the validity of our proposal in different research disciplines (clearly outperforming a text-based latent topic model) and provides further insights regarding the effects of number of latent topics in the model and the trade-off between recency and quantity of the users' libraries.

References

  1. Joeran Beel, Bela Gipp, Stefan Langer, and Corinna Breitinger. 2016. Research-paper recommender systems: a literature survey. International Journal on Digital Libraries 17, 4 (nov 2016), 305--338. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00799-015-0156-0 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Joeran Beel, Stefan Langer, Marcel Genzmehr, and Andreas Nürnberger. 2013. Introducing Docear's Research Paper Recommender System. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL '13). 459--460. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2467696.2467786 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. David M Blei. 2012. Probabilistic topic models. Commun. ACM 55, 4 (2012), 77--84. https://doi.org/10.1145/2133806.2133826Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. David M Blei and John D Lafferty. 2009. Visualizing topics with multi-word expressions. arXivpreprint arXiv:0907.1013 (2009). https://arxiv.org/abs/0907.1013Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. David M. Blei, Andrew Y. Ng, and Michael I. Jordan. 2003. Latent Dirichlet Allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3 (March 2003), 993--1022. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=944919.944937Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Scott Deerwester, Susan T. Dumais, George W. Furnas, Thomas K. Landauer, and Richard Harshman. 1990. Indexing by latent semantic analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 41, 6 (1990), 391--407. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199009)41:6<391::AID-ASI1>3.0.CO;2-9 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Thomas L Griffiths and Mark Steyvers. 2004. Finding scientific topics. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101, Suppl 1 (2004), 5228--5235. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307752101 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Asela Gunawardana and Guy Shani. 2009. A Survey of Accuracy Evaluation Metrics of Recommendation Tasks. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 10 (Dec. 2009), 2935--2962. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1577069.1755883Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Jonathan L. Herlocker, Joseph A. Konstan, and John Riedl. 2000. Explaining Collaborative Filtering Recommendations. In Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '00). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 241--250. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/358916.358995 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Thomas Hofmann. 2004. Latent Semantic Models for Collaborative Filtering. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 22, 1 (Jan. 2004), 89--115. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/963770.963774 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Pijitra Jomsri, Siripun Sanguansintukul, and Worasit Choochaiwattana. 2010. A Framework for Tag-Based Research Paper Recommender System: An IR Approach. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE 24th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops (WAINA '10). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 103--108. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/WAINA.2010.35 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Y. Koren, R. Bell, and C. Volinsky. 2009. Matrix Factorization Techniques for Recommender Systems. Computer 42, 8 (Aug 2009), 30--37. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2009.263 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Onur Küçüktunç, Erik Saule, Kamer Kaya, and Ümit V. Çatalyürek. 2012. Recommendation on Academic Networks using Direction Aware Citation Analysis. CoRR abs/1205.1143 (2012). http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.1143Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Davide Magatti, Fabio Stella, Silvia Calegari, and Davide Ciucci. 2009. Automatic Labeling of Topics. Intelligent Systems Design and Applications, International Conference on 00 (2009), 1227--1232. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/ISDA.2009.165Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Andrew Kachites McCallum. 2002. MALLET: A Machine Learning for Language Toolkit. (2002). http://mallet.cs.umass.eduGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Sean M. McNee, Istvan Albert, Dan Cosley, Prateep Gopalkrishnan, Shyong K. Lam, Al Mamunur Rashid, Joseph A. Konstan, and John Riedl. 2002. On the Recommending of Citations for Research Papers. In Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '02). 116--125. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/587078.587096 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Anna Ritchie, Simone Teufel, and Stephen Robertson. 2008. Using Terms from Citations for IR: Some First Results. In Proceedings of the IR Research, 30th European Conference on Advances in Information Retrieval (ECIR'08). 211--221. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1793274.1793303Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. M. Rossetti, F. Stella, and M. Zanker. 2013. Towards Explaining Latent Factors with Topic Models in Collaborative Recommender Systems. In 2013 24th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications. 162--167. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/DEXA.2013.26 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Saül Vargas, Maya Hristakeva, and Kris Jack. 2016. Mendeley: Recommendations for Researchers. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems - RecSys '16. 365--365. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2959100.2959116 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Chong Wang and David M. Blei. 2011. Collaborative Topic Modeling for Recommending Scientific Articles. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 448--456. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2020408.2020480 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Yuan Cao Zhang, Diarmuid Ó Séaghdha, Daniele Quercia, and Tamas Jambor. 2012. Auralist: Introducing Serendipity into Music Recommendation. In Proceedings of the Fifth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM '12). 13--22. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2124295.2124300 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

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 Other conferences
    SWM '17: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Scholarly Web Mining
    February 2017
    65 pages
    ISBN:9781450352406
    DOI:10.1145/3057148

    Copyright © 2017 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 the author(s) 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: 10 February 2017

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    SWM '17 Paper Acceptance Rate8of17submissions,47%Overall Acceptance Rate8of17submissions,47%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader