skip to main content
10.1145/3152494.3152513acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescodsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

FuTSe: a fuzzy taxonomy service to facilitate product search

Published: 11 January 2018 Publication History

Abstract

The number of people who buy services and products on-line have drastically accelerated over the last couple of years. Service and product vendors like IBM and Amazon claim that 50% of their customers begin their journey on the respective on-line sites be it for technical support, maintenance services or new product purchase. Enabling customers to get to the service/product they are looking for in the most efficient manner is an important problem to solve for superior customer experience. In the specific industry of Technical support services, product sites get several thousand search queries every day. These queries vary across a range of technical issues, maintenance requests or new purchases for a suite of hardware and software products. The key to responding satisfactorily to these queries is in understanding the products or the services being talked about. Our analysis shows that majority of the time users either do not specify the product or the service name in the search query, or they use a non-standard, colloquial version of the name. Thus, finding the right product/service by either implicitly using context or fuzzily using the search terms is both a crucial problem to solve for on-line service providers as well as for the customers. Faceted search and keyword-based search does not work when there are partial or incomplete queries, and typographical mistakes or absence of product information. In this paper, we build a fuzzy-based taxonomy service that (a) extracts the keywords from a user query, (b) handles partial queries by auto-completing in context, (c) utilizes user browsing context and then (d) uses a fuzzy-based similarity metric to retrieve relevant products/services and their associated information from the product taxonomy file. We show on real user queries that by using the service we are able to get 90% of the product names accurately for a technical service provider, when they are either not mentioned or incomplete.

References

[1]
{n. d.}. Amazon Grabs 55 Percent of Consumers' First Product Search, Set to Dominate 2016 Holiday Shopping. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/amazon-grabs-55-percent-of-consumers-first-product-search-set-to-dominate-2016-holiday-shopping-300334545.html/. ({n. d.}).
[2]
{n. d.}. Google Merchant Center: The Google product taxonomy. https://www.google.com/retail/merchant-center/. ({n. d.}).
[3]
A. Bougouin, F. Boudin, and B. Daille. 2013. Topicrank: Graph-based topic ranking for keyphrase extraction. In International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing. 543--551.
[4]
S. Danesh, T. Sumner, and J. H. Martin. 2015. Sgrank: Combining statistical and graphical methods to improve the state of the art in unsupervised keyphrase extraction. Lexical and Computational Semantics (2015).
[5]
Wael H Gomaa and Aly A Fahmy. 2013. A survey of text similarity approaches. International Journal of Computer Applications 68, 13 (2013).
[6]
K. S. Hasan and V. Ng. 2014. Automatic keyphrase extraction: A survey of the state of the art. In 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. 1262--1273.
[7]
Homa B. Hashemi, Amir Asiaee, and Reiner Kraft. 2016. Query Intent Detection using Convolutional Neural Networks.
[8]
P. Lawrence. 1990. Hanging on the Metaphone. Computer Language 7 (1990).
[9]
Z. Liu, P. Li, Y. Zheng, and M. Sun. 2009. Clustering to find exemplar terms for keyphrase extraction. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 257--266.
[10]
A. Loehrlein, V. Lemieux, and M. Bennet. 2014. The classification of financial products. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65 (2014).
[11]
R. Mihalcea and P. Tarau. 2004. Textrank: Bringing order into text. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Langugae Processing. 404--411.
[12]
Tomas Mikolov, Stefan Kombrink, Anoop Deoras, Lukar Burget, and Jan Cernocky. 2011. Rnnlm-recurrent neural network language modeling toolkit. In Proc. of the 2011 ASRU Workshop. 196--201.
[13]
Johannes Osterhoff, Jörg Waitelonis, and Harald Sack. 2012. Widen the Peepholes! Entity-based Auto-Suggestion as a rich and yet immediate Starting Point for Exploratory Search. In GI-Jahrestagung. 1039--1046.
[14]
Abhay Prakash and Dhaval Patel. 2015. Techniques for Deep Query Understanding. CoRR abs/1505.05187 (2015). arXiv:1505.05187 http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.05187
[15]
Chaudhuri S., Ganjam K., Ganti V., and Motwani R. 2003. Robust and effecient fuzzy match for online data cleaning. In SIGMOD. 313--324.
[16]
D. Shen, J. D. Ruvini, M. Somaiya, and N. Sundaresan. 2011. Item categorization in the e-commerce domain. In International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. 1921--1924.
[17]
Cohen W. W., Ravikumar P. D., and Fienberg S. E. 2003. A comparison of string distance metrics for name-matching tasks. In IIWeb. 73--78.
[18]
X. Wan and J. Xiao. 2008. Single document keyphrase extraction using neighborhood knowledge. In Proceedings of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence. 855--860.
[19]
J. Wang, G. Li, and J. Fe. 2011. Fast-join: an efficient method for for fuzzy token matching based sting similarity join. In IEEE 27th International Conference on Data Engineering.
[20]
J. Wang, G. Li, and J. Fe. 2014. Extending string similarity join to tolerant fuzzy token matching. ACM Transactions Database Systems 39 (2014). Issue 7.
[21]
David Ward, Jim Hahn, and Kirsten Feist. 2012. Autocomplete as a research tool: a study on providing search suggestions. Information Technology and Libraries (Online) 31, 4 (2012), 6.
[22]
Y. Zhang, E. Milios, and N. Zincir-Heyworrd. 2007. A comparative study on key phrase extraction methods in automatic web site summarization. In Journal of Digital Information Management, Vol. 5. Issue 5.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
CODS-COMAD '18: Proceedings of the ACM India Joint International Conference on Data Science and Management of Data
January 2018
379 pages
ISBN:9781450363419
DOI:10.1145/3152494
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: 11 January 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. fuzzy matching
  2. partial queries
  3. product taxonomy

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

CoDS-COMAD '18

Acceptance Rates

CODS-COMAD '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 50 of 150 submissions, 33%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 197 of 680 submissions, 29%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 86
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 01 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media