1. The Mechanical Librarian
Recommending Journal Articles
in a Scientific Digital Library
Andre Vellino
andre.vellino@cnrc.ca
Group Leader, CISTI Research Chef de groupe, Recherche ICIST
Canada Institute for Scientific Institute canadien de l'information
and Technical Information scientifique et technique
2. Outline of Talk
• The Mechanical Librarian
• How Recommenders Work
• Recommenders in Digital Libraries
• Problems for Science Article Recommenders and
Strategies for CISTI’s Recommender Research
• Synthese on CISTI Lab
• Alternative Approaches
• Future Work
Acknowledgements to: Glen Newton, Jeff Demaine and Greg Kresko &
Students : Dave Zeber, Matthew Rutledge-Taylor and Aurel Constantinescu 2
3. The Human (Reference)
Librarian
Experience
World Knowledge
Vocabularies
Databases
Authoritative
Trustworthy
References
3
4. The Mechanical Librarian
The Web, they say, is leaving the era of search and entering
one of discovery. What's the difference? Search is what you
do when you're looking for something. Discovery is when
something wonderful that you didn't know existed, or didn't
know how to ask for, finds you.
Jeffrey M. O'Brien, Fortune Magazine
4
5. Knowledge Discovery
Technologies
• Text Mining
– Enhances the researcher’s ability to
discover new and meaningful information
from existing text repositories
• Network Analysis
– Distills the structural relationships among
bibliographic elements to reveal trends
and patterns in science
• User Behaviour
– Infers “wisdom of the crowds” from
usage statistics
5
6. What is a “Recommender”?
• A recommender is a software system which attempts to predict
items that a user may be interested in, given information about
– the user's interests
– the content in the items
– the usage patterns of other users
• Items may be:
– Merchandise: movies, music, books
– Text: news, blogs, web pages, and, why not,
Scientific Journal Articles
10. Companies That Sell
Recommender Services
Product Merchandise Placement
Database Mining
Advertizing / Product Placement
Software as a Service Platform
10
11. Recommendation is Hard
Netflix Prize: $1M
• Netflix Prize
– To develop a recommender that improves quality of
recommendations by 10% over Netflix’s
– http://www.netflixprize.com/
• Current Leader Board
– BellKor (9.6%)
– … + 39 others
• NY Times Magazine Article
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/magazine/23Netflix-t.html
11
13. Outline of Talk
• The Mechanical Librarian
• How Recommenders Work
• Recommenders in Digital Libraries
• Problems for Science Article Recommenders and
Strategies for CISTI’s Recommender Research
• Demonstration of Synthese on CISTI Lab
• Alternative Approaches
• Future Work
13
14. Taxonomy of
Recommender Systems
Collaborative Filtering
• Usage based, with item-ratings
– User-Based (“similar users”)
– Item-Based (“like items”)
• Algorithms
– Memory-based
– Model-based
Content-Based Filtering
• Content (text / waveform / pixel) analysis to
– Find “similar users”
– Find “similar items”
J. Breese, D. Heckerman, C. Kadie, et al. Empirical Analysis of Predictive Algorithms for Collaborative
Filtering. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 461, 1998.
15. How Collaborative
Filtering (CF) Works
• User-Based CF
– Given user A find all the other users {U} that have the most
“similar” item-rating patterns
– For each item I not yet rated by A, predict the likely rating A will
assign to I given the ratings for I given by {U}
– Present the Top-N ordered list of items {I} to the user
• Item-Based CF
– Given user A and the set of items {I} to which A has given
ratings, find all the other items {O} that are “similar” to {I}
– Present the Top-N ordered list of items {O} to the user
Sarwar, Badrul M., George Karypis, Joseph A. Konstan, and John Reidl. quot;Item-based
collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms.quot; World Wide Web. 2001, 285-295. 15
16. Find “Nearest Neighbour”
and Predict Rating
• Find Nearest Neighbours (e.g. cosine similarity)
• Predict Rating (item i for user u)
– Weighted average of user’s ratings on N similar users
16
17. User-Based
Collaborative Filtering
Users
Movies Milk Doubt Dark Night Bolt Reader
Alice 5 4 3 5 2
Bob 1 5 5
Carol 4 3 4
Ted 4 4 ?
5
• Goal: predict the rating Ted will give to the movie “Bolt”
• Step 1 – eliminate the user-profiles of users who didn’t rate “Bolt”
• Step 2 – find Ted’s “K-nearest neighbours” who rated “Bolt” and at
least 2 other movies (Alice)
• R(Ted,Bolt) ~= 5.
17
18. Things that can go wrong
with Collaborative Filtering
• False “product ratings” to artificially boost ranking (spamming)
• Losing the diversity in the “Long Tail” – converges to “Top N”.
Fleder, D. and K. Hosanagar. 2008. Blockbuster culture's next rise or fall: The effect of
18
recommender systems on sales diversity. NET Institute Working Paper 07-10.
19. Content-Based
Recommenders
“These things are similar (in content) to that”.
• Depends only on a measure of similarity between the content in
the items (text, music, images)
• Typical Steps for Content Based Recommenders
1. Cluster the user’s purchased or highly-rated items by
content-similarity
2. Find other similar items not purchased or rated by the user
3. Recommend the “Top N” to the user
19
20. Search Engine as
“Content-Based
Recommender”
Collaborative filtering
22. What can go wrong with
Content Based
Recommenders
that use only Metadata
• Bad Men Do What Good Men Dream: A Forensic Psychiatrist
Illuminates the Darker Side of Human Behavior
• Do Animals Dream?: Children's Questions about Animals Most
Often asked of the Natural History Museum
• All I Do is Dream of You The other end of the leash : why we do
what we do around dogs
• Why do Catholics do that : a guide to the teachings and practices
of the Catholic Church
• Electric universe : the shocking true story of electricity
• The Island of Sheep
23. Outline of Talk
• The Mechanical Librarian
• How Recommenders Work
• Recommenders in Digital Libraries
• Problems for Science Article Recommenders and
Strategies for CISTI’s Recommender Research
• Demonstration of Synthese on CISTI Lab
• Alternative Approaches
• Future Work
23
24. Value of Recommenders
in a Digital Library
• For the Researcher
– Provide serendipity in a Browse / Search / Retrieve portal
• Broaden scope of search to cognate but otherwise disparate domains
• For the Library
– Increase customer loyalty by creating dynamic, adaptive,
customized services
• Alerts & notifications based on usage and collaborative filtering rather
than stored queries
• For Authors
– Given a draft article (with citations), find additional citations
• For Publishers & Journal Reviewers
– Given a submitted article, recommending peer-reviewers
24
25. Recommender Systems in
Digital Libraries
– Techlens (University of Minnesota) (2002)
• Uses ACM DL, full text Mixed Hybrid
– BibTip (University of Karlsruhe) (2003)
• Uses OPAC (Library Catalog) usage data for collaborative filtering
– IngentaConnect (2007)
• Uses Baynote (SaaS) customer tracking
– DSpace (2008)
• Content-based recommender based on user-bookmarks
– CiteULike (academic experiment 2008)
• Collaborative filtering on user bookmarks from CiteULike
– “bX” system from Ex Libris (2009)
• Uses SFX resolver logs
– NextBio (to be announced in March 2009)
• Life sciences search engine that uses collaborative filtering + ontologies
to suggest new content (trials / abstracts / data)
25
27. “bX”
Recommender (Jan „09)
Features
• Uses log data from SFX resolvers
• Applies Collaborative Filtering
• Uses lots of aggregated data
• Developed w/ the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Possible issues
• Infers identity of users only through IP address
• May not be accurate when http proxies are used
• Same IP address can have several “IR objectives”
• Identical resolved objects may not be recognized
27
28. Outline of Talk
• The Mechanical Librarian
• How Recommenders Work
• Recommenders in Digital Libraries
• Problems for Science Article Recommenders and
Strategies for CISTI’s Recommender Research
• Demonstration of Synthese on CISTI Lab
• Alternative Approaches
• Future Work
28
29. Typical Problems with CF
Recommenders in General
• Data Sparsity
– Ratio of Users / Items is low (~ 1:10)
– Number of Ratings per User is low
– Ratings matrix sparsity ~ 95%
• Cold Start Problem
– First-time users get poor or no recommendations because CF matrix
has no entries
• Rating Items
– CF recommender must be trained (explicitly or implicitly) by providing
ratings to items
• Principle of Induction
– People who exhibited similar behaviour in the past will tend to exhibit
similar behaviour in the future.
29
30. Specific Problems for
Collaborative Filtering in
Science Digital Libraries
• Data Sparsity
– Many More Articles & Far Fewer Users (10x)
– Fewer Item / Ratings (~ 99% sparsity)
• Rating Articles
– Explicit ratings are more difficult to obtain
• DL users have less need to “express themselves” by explicitly rating
items than movie watchers
– Implicit ratings depend on UI features of DL
• No reliable method for inferring ratings from browsing and query
behaviour
• Principle of Induction (that past is a good predictor of the future) not
necessarily true in digital libraries
– Interest drift
– Context shifts
30
31. Recommender Research
Strategy @ CISTI
• Follow in footsteps of TechLens+
– Collaborative Filtering (CF) among users
– Seed CF recommender with citation matrix
– Extended with
• PageRank on Citations
• User Contexts
– Future Extensions
• Add Content-Based Filtering (“Fusion Mixed Hybrid” model)
• Distributed Multi-Dimensional Recommender
• Explanation-based interface
A. Vellino and D. Zeber. (2007) “A Hybrid, Multi-dimensional Recommender for Journal
Articles in a Scientific Digital Library.” Conference Proceedings on Web Intelligence and
Intelligent Agent Technology 31
33. Recommender Citation
Seeding
TechLens approach to Cold Start / Data Sparsity problem
• Articles either cite or don’t cite other articles
• Some articles that are cited are not in collection
• Users’ “article collection profile” citations 33
34. Outline of Talk
• The Mechanical Librarian
• How Recommenders Work
• Recommenders in Digital Libraries
• Problems for Science Article Recommenders and
Strategies for CISTI’s Recommender Research
• Demonstration of Synthese on CISTI Lab
• Alternative Approaches
• Future Work
34
50. Recommender Citation
Seeding
Can we improve on 0 / 1 (Boolean) citation seeding?
50
51. Apply PageRank to
Citation Matrix
PageRank algorithm applied to citations
Aurel Constantinescu “Ranking Full-Text Articles using Citation Based Methods”
51
Master’s Thesis, University of Ottawa
52. PageRank-weighted
Citation matrix
p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 citations
p1
0.4
p2 0.5 0.4
articles
p3 0.2 0.6
p4
0.7 0.5
u1
0.5 0.3 0.6
users
= constant
u2
0.2 0.3
• Apply Page Rank on Citations
– Use citation data (as in TechLens+)
– Apply PageRank to weight the citation-based “ratings”
• Done before but only at the Journal level (http://www.eigenfactor.org/)
52
53. PageRank Experimental
Results
A. Vellino “The Effect of PageRank on the Collaborative Filtering of Journal Articles”
53
NRC Research Report, 2008.
54. Outline of Talk
• The Mechanical Librarian
• How Recommenders Work
• Recommenders in Digital Libraries
• Problems for Science Article Recommenders and
Strategies for CISTI’s Recommender Research
• Demonstration of Synthese on CISTI Lab
• Alternative Approaches
• Future Work
54
55. What is a Holographic
Memory System?
• A Holographic Memory System (HMS) stores information in
a manner analogous to the storage of an image on a
holographic plate.
• HMS is composed of units called items
– Each item represents some content
• e.g, a concept, a word, a bibliographic item
– Items are analogous to points on the surface of
holographic film (or, plate)
– Each item stores information about the associations it
has with other items
T. A. Plate, 2003 Holographic Reduced Representations: Distributed Representations for
Cognitive Structures (Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications)
56. Holographic Memory
System (HMS)
HMS
Holography
Red
Fruit
Spherical
Apple
Each point on the Holographic plate
stores information about many parts Each item stores information about
of the image many other items in the system
57. HMS Recommender for
Journal Articles
• We compared DSHM and user-based CF on journal article
recommendation on 2 small collections
Medicine Biology
7495 articles 38,667 articles
0.55 references per article 1.15 references per article
• 90% - 10% Cross Validation
• systematically removed one reference at a time
• tested whether recommender predicts the reference.
• compared DSHM and user-based CF
M. F. Rutledge-Taylor, A. Vellino and R. L. West. “A Holographic Associative Memory
Recommender System” 3rd Int. Conference on Digital Information Management, London, 2008.
59. Holographic Recommender:
Discussion
• Advantages
– Holographic System outperformed standard user-based
CF on very sparse bibliographic datasets
– DSHM is better able to exploit the available information
– The uniformly consistent model of DSHM gives it good
potential for success on multi-dimensional datasets
• Disadvantages
– Requires a lot of computational resources
– Unclear about how it works on a large scale.
60. Outline of Talk
• The Mechanical Librarian
• How Recommenders Work
• Recommenders in Digital Libraries
• Problems for Science Article Recommenders and
Strategies for CISTI’s Recommender Research
• Demonstration of Synthese on CISTI Lab
• Alternative Approaches
• Future Work
60
61. Multi-Dimensional Ratings
Matrix
G. Adomavicious, R. Sankaranarayanan, S. Sen, A. Tuzhilin, ACM Transactions on Information Systems 2005
Incorporating Contextual Information in Recommender Systems Using a Multidimensional Approach 61
62. Scaling Strategy:
Distributed
Recommenders
• Multiple ratings matrices decomposed by subject area
• Merge separate recommendations by subject
• Reduces matrix sparsity
• Improves accuracy of recommendations
S. Berkovsky, T.Kuflik, and F. Ricci Distributed Collaborative Filtering with 62
Domain Specialization Proceedings of Recommender Systems 2007
63. Importance of Quality and
Trust
What predicts overall usefulness of a System?
0.6
0.5
Correlation
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Good Rec. Useful Rec. Trust Adequate Ease of
Generating Item Use
Rec. Description
63
Rashmi Sinha & Kirsten Swearingen – UC Berkeley
64. UI for Navigating
Recommendations
• Explanation-based
Recommendations
– Provide transparency
increase user trust
– Allow users to cluster by
type of reason
– Filter out unwanted
recommendations
P. Pu and L. Chen. Trust Building with Explanation Interfaces. In IUI ’06: Proceedings of
the 11th International Conference On Intelligent User Interfaces, pages 93–100 64
65. Conclusions
• Recommender technology is only 12 years old, but mature
enough for widespread commercial use.
• Digital Libraries / Web 2.0 Bibliographic applications are
beginning to use recommenders.
• Digital Libraries create new problems for recommenders
(“context drift” / “data sparsity” / “multiple dimensions”)
• Recommenders insufficiently understood in Digital Libraries.
• Recommender as mechanism for enhancing the process of
scientific discovery promising but still uncertain.
65
