Urban Point-of-Interest Recommendation by Mining User Check-in Behaviors 游晟佑 2012.12.5.
-
Upload
theodore-bradford -
Category
Documents
-
view
230 -
download
0
Transcript of Urban Point-of-Interest Recommendation by Mining User Check-in Behaviors 游晟佑 2012.12.5.
Urban Point-of-Interest Recommendation by Mining
UserCheck-in Behaviors
游晟佑2012.12.5
2
Outline
1. Authors
2. Introduction
3. UPOI Mine Algorithm
4. Experimental Results and Discussions
3
Authors
• Josh Jia-Ching Ying, Eric Hsueh-Chan Lu, Wen-Ning Kuo and Vincent S. Tseng
• Institute of Computer Science and Information Engineering
• National Cheng Kung University
4
Introduction (1/2)
• Why use UPOI Mine?– a number of social based recommendation
techniques have been proposed in the literature, most of their concepts are only based on the individual or friends' check-in behaviors. (his / her historical data or limited in geographical area)
– regression-tree-based predictor, 1st time use in this kind of research (They asserted)
– a real dataset from Gowalla!
5
Introduction (2/2)
• What makes it different?–More comprehensive
• Stepsi) Social Factor,
ii) Individual Preference, and
iii) POI Popularity for model building
For extracting features in i), ii) iii), and feed it into regression tree model ->
relevance score ->
POI recommendation
6
UPOI Mine Algorithm(1/11)
1. Social Factor (SF), (朋友在哪邊打卡了 ?打卡次數 ?打卡地點是否與該 user接近 ?)CheckSim, DisSim
2. Individual Preference (IP)
Descriptive features and semantic tags from user check-in POIsCpref, Hpref
3. POI Popularity (PP)
We employ the popularity of POI to make a "maximum likelihood estimation" of the relative between user and POIRP(relative popularity of POI)
把以上三樣 features的來源餵進 regression tree model
7
UPOI Mine Algorithm(2/11)
8
UPOI Mine Algorithm(3/11)
• Features from Social Factor(SF)– given a friend f and a set of POI P, the f’s relative check-ins
of a POI p is formulated as:
– given a user-POI pair (u, p), the features extracted form Social Factor could be generally formulated as:
9
UPOI Mine Algorithm(4/11)
– Similarity Measurement• In a LBSN data, the most important information is
user’s common check-ins and distance among users for user similarity measurement.– Similarity by Common Check-ins (CheckSim) - We employ
the χ2 test for testing relation of check-in behaviors of Gowalla users and their friends.
10
UPOI Mine Algorithm(5/11)
11
UPOI Mine Algorithm(6/11)
– Similarity by Relative Distance (DisSim)
where Distance() indicates the Euclidean distance of two
base-points and F(u) indicates the set of user u’s friends.
12
UPOI Mine Algorithm(7/11)
• Features from Individual Preference(IP)– In Gowalla website, there are two kinds of
semantic tags, i.e., category and highlight– where count(t, p) indicates the number of times the tag t is annotated on the POI p ,and
T(p) indicates the set of tags of POI p. – the possibility of that a tag ’coffee’ is annotated on a POI is 2 / (2 + 10 + 88) = 0.22
13
UPOI Mine Algorithm(8/11)
– Accordingly, given a user-POI pair (u, p), the features extracted form Individual Preference could be generally formulated as:
14
UPOI Mine Algorithm(9/11)
– Cpref(preference of category)
(note: 1,0,2,5,0 for user i)
• The user i’s personal preference of a category tag A is:
• (1+0+0) / (1+0+2+5+0) = 0.125
– Hpref(preference in Highlight)• The user i’s personal preference of a highlight tag a is:
(1+2+5)
/ { (1+2+5) + (1+0)+(0+5)+(0+2)
+(0) } = 0.5
15
UPOI Mine Algorithm(10/11)
• Features from POI Popularity(PP)
{3, 12, 3, 7, 5}• the set of POIs with category tag A are p1, p2, and p5. The total
check-in of POI p1, p2, and p5 are 3, 12, and 5, respectively. Thus, the popularity of POI p1 is
• 3 / (3 + 12 + 5) = 0.15
16
UPOI Mine Algorithm (11/11)
• POI recommendation–We choose M5Prime as the relevance score
predictor because it has shown excellent performance in similar tasks
17
Experimental Results and Discussions(1/3)
• Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain (NDCG) to measure the list of recommended POIs. – NDCG 1.0 means the effectiveness of
recommender is pretty good
• Mean Absolute Error (MAE) to measure the list of recommended POIs as Equation– The lower MAE is, the fewer error is
18
Experimental Results and Discussions(2/3)
All these means this kind of data is good. Also they compared earlier works to proof this method is good.
19
Experimental Results and Discussions(3/3)
• We compare the performance of UPOI-Mine with TrustWalker [5] and CF-based model [14] in terms of NDCG and MAE
Thanks for your listening …