<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Recommender Ensembles for News Articles based on Most-Popular Strategies</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Andreas Lommatzsch</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Niels Johannes</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jens Meiners</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Lea Helmers</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jaschar Domann</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Technische Universitat Berlin Agent Technologies in Business Applications and Telecommunication Group (AOT) Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>D-10587 Berlin</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="DE">Germany</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>With the change from classical paper-based to online representations of newspapers publishers are able to provide adaptive recommender services supporting users in nding the relevant articles in the huge amount of published news. Since most traditional recommender approaches are tailored to scenarios characterized by static sets of items and exactly identi able users, these approaches cannot be utilized for anonymously consumed news portals o ering a continuously changing set of items. In order to develop an e cient recommender system optimized to the speci c requirements of news portals, we analyze the user behavior and de ne a model for computing recommendations. We have developed tools for continuously monitoring the user preferences and analyzing the features of the most popular news articles. The derived recommender models are implemented in Java using a recommender ensemble architecture that is able to adapt to the speci c characteristics of di erent news portals. The evaluation of the implemented recommender in the CLEF NewsREEL challenge shows that our system provides reliable results and reaches a high Click-Through-Rate. The implemented architecture is open to further optimization with respect to di erent load levels and context parameters.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>stream recommender</kwd>
        <kwd>recommender ensemble</kwd>
        <kwd>online stream monitoring online and o ine evaluation</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>Current news portals o er huge, continuously changing collections of news
articles. In order to support users in nding relevant articles, publishers integrate
recommender components suggesting potentially interesting articles to users.</p>
      <p>The development of recommender components for news portals leads to
several challenges. First, the item sets o ered by news portals change continuously.
Second, the identi cation of users does not work precisely since users access the
portals anonymously without logging in. Third, the algorithms must be
capable of handling high load scenarios and ensure that recommendation requests
are successfully answered within short time limits. Moreover, each news
portal has its speci c characteristics requiring a customization of the recommender
algorithms for the respective domain.</p>
      <p>
        We focus on the news recommendation scenario de ned in the CLEF
NewsREEL challenge [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5 ref9">5,9</xref>
        ]. Here we participate in both tasks de ned in the challenge:
Task 1 (Living Lab Evaluation) is based on live user feedback; Task 2 (O ine
Evaluation Lab) is based on replaying large datasets recorded in the Living Lab
scenario. In Task 1 [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ] the participating teams get live information about
impressions (a user requests an article), clicks (a user clicks on a recommendation) and
published articles (a publisher releases a new article). In addition, teams receive
recommendation requests that must be answered within 100ms. The performance
of the recommender algorithms is computed based on the Click-Through-Rate
(CTR). The CTR de nes the fraction of recommendation requests for that the
users click on the provided recommendations. The error rate describes the
fraction of incorrectly answered requests (e.g. violating the time constraints).
      </p>
      <p>
        In Task 2 [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ] the performance is measure based on the o ine CTR
(computed based on the overlap of recommendations and future impression).
Technical aspects are measure based on the throughput and the response time for
di erent load levels.
      </p>
      <p>In this work we develop recommender algorithms for news portals addressing
the discussed challenges. We analyze the log les from di erent news portals
in order to get insights into the user behavior. Based on the identi ed user
preferences we de ned a recommender model. The implemented recommender
is evaluated both online and o ine in the CLEF NewsREEL challenge. We
show that the implemented recommender provides high-quality recommendation
results with respect to the CTR and ensures a short response time. Due to the
exible architecture of our system, the recommender can be further optimized
by dynamically adapting the parameters to the context requirements.</p>
      <p>The remaining paper is structured as follows: Section 2 gives a brief overview
on existing news recommender algorithms and approaches. Our analysis of the
o ine log data and the developed online log analysis tool are explained in
Section 3. This section also discusses the derived recommender model and the
architecture of the implemented recommender system. The evaluation results are
presented in Section 4. Finally, a conclusion and an outlook to future work are
given in Section 5.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Related Work</title>
      <p>
        In this Section we review existing approaches to recommender systems and
analyze how these algorithms t with the requirements of our scenario.
User-based Collaborative Filtering Most recommender systems implement
Collaborative Filtering (CF). CF-based algorithms analyze the user feedback (e.g.
ratings user assign to items) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. User-based CF algorithms compute the
similarity between users and suggest items similar users liked. The algorithm requires a
su cient number of ratings for all users and items. This is one of the weaknesses
of the approach. User-based CF algorithms do not reliably provide
recommendations for new users due to the fact that without a su cient number of ratings,
users having a similar \taste" cannot be determined (\cold start problem") [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>In the analyzed news recommendation scenario, the sets of users and items
change continuously. This leads to a permanent cold start problem. Thus, in our
case, user-based CF does not seem to be a suitable approach.</p>
      <p>
        Item- and Content-based Recommender Approaches An alternative to user-based
CF are item-to-item recommender algorithms. These approaches are based on
the idea that users prefer items similar to items they liked in the past. The
similarity between the items can either be computed based on ratings (item-based
CF) or based on the content features of the items (content-based ltering) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ].
Content-based recommender algorithms do not su er from the cold start
problem. However, content-based features provide less information on the relevance
of an item (compared with collaborative features). That is the reason why
ratingbased approaches outperform content-based approaches in many scenarios [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ].
Moreover, item-to-item recommenders neither consider news trends nor the
information about the user's context. This means that highly important aspects
for assessing the relevance of news articles are not taken into account.
Popularity-based algorithms News articles are characterized by a short life cycle.
The top news articles are relevant for a huge number of readers during a short
time period [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ]. This observation is used by most-popular algorithms. These
algorithms analyze the behavior of the user crowd and suggest the most read
articles. The idea behind this strategy is that articles that are interesting for
most users are also relevant for new users.
      </p>
      <p>
        In the news recommendation scenario this approach seems to be promising
due to the fact that it can handle fast changing sets of users and items [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. It
does neither require an exact identi cation of users nor additional meta-data for
items. In order to apply a most-popular algorithm in the news recommendation
scenario, an appropriate strategy for handling the changes in the user interests
and the changes in the item set must be implemented.
      </p>
      <p>Discussion In the analyzed news recommendation scenario the use of
mostpopular algorithms seems to be an adequate approach. In contrast to user-based
CF, most-popular algorithms do not su er from the cold start problem and
do not require exact user pro les. Di erently from content-based approaches,
they analyze the user behavior instead of content features leading to a
better recommendation precision. This analysis motivates us to further investigate
most-popular algorithms.
3</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Approach</title>
      <p>In this section we rst analyze the o ine log data from the news portals (part
of the NewsREEL challenge) to study the trends in the user behavior in detail.
Subsequently, we describe the approaches and tools used for de ning a suitable
recommender model and discuss the implemented strategy in detail.
3.1</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Analysis of O ine Data</title>
        <p>In order to de ne an e cient recommender model we analyze the o ine log
data. We assess user behavior with respect to impressions and clicks searching
for patterns that indicate the users' preferences.</p>
        <p>In a rst step, we analyze the correlation of impressions and clicks. Figure 1
shows that news articles receiving a large number of clicks typically also have a
large number of impressions; but a large number of impressions does not
necessarily imply that an article receives a high number of clicks. With respect to the
development of a recommender algorithm, Figure 1 shows that a large number of
impressions is a valuable indicator that an article is interesting and a promising
candidate for answering a recommendation request.</p>
        <p>In a next step, we analyze the distribution of the number of impressions over
the set of articles. Figure 2 shows the number of impression (y-axis) with respect
to the rank of impressions (x-axis) for di erent publishers. The impression rank
is computed by sorting the article set in descending order of the impression
count. The article with the highest number of impressions has an impression
rank of zero. The graphs show that there are very few articles with very high
1,E+08
t 1,E+07
un 1,E+06
o
cn 1,E+05
o
iss 1,E+04
e
rp 1,E+03
im1,E+02
1,E+01
1,E+00
0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900</p>
        <p>impression rank
impression count while the curve decays very fast with the impression rank. The
observation indicates that there are articles of very high interest for most users.
Thus recommending the most popular articles seems to be a promising strategy
since most users are likely to read these articles.
3.2</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Live Analysis of Online Data</title>
        <p>The analysis of the o ine log data motivates us to analyze the most popular
articles in detail. We develop an online log viewer allowing us the visualization
of characteristic features of the most popular articles for each news portal.</p>
        <p>The online analysis tool consists of a database and two components, one
for aggregating the relevant information from the online message stream and
one for visualizing the data. The data aggregation component extracts data
relevant for the analysis from the message stream and stores it in a database.
The data comprise the article title, the article text, the publisher, and additional
meta-data. Furthermore, it aggregates the number of clicks and the number of
impressions on a 15 minutes basis.</p>
        <p>The visualization component is implemented as a web application based on
a Grizzly web server1. The web application uses SQL statements for retrieving
the data from the database required in the visualization. The data are converted
to the JSON format and sent to the HTML client that places the data on the
HTML formatted web page.</p>
        <p>The created user interface visualizes the most popular articles for the di erent
domains and for a user-de ned timeframe. For each publisher, articles are sorted
by the number of impressions within the set time segment. Figure 3 shows a
visualization example. For the analysis the time frame and the publisher must be
de ned. The tool visualizes the number of impressions for the selected publisher
in a histogram. The news articles (most popular in the selected time frame) are
shown in a list. For each article the most important information is displayed.
1 https://grizzly.java.net/</p>
        <p>Fig. 3. The gure shows the front page of the online monitoring web application.</p>
        <p>This includes the title of the article, the articlesID, the number of views within
the set time segment and the abstract summarizing the content.</p>
        <p>Furthermore, the click on an article opens a new panel showing the impression
statistic for each article. The diagram visualizes the number of impressions per
hour during the last three days. Figure 4 shows an example chart for a selected
article published on May 13th, 2016, at 12 o'clock. The graph shows the high
variance in the number of impressions per hour over the day. Another important
aspect the chart reveals is that the number of impressions per hour decreases
over time. This is due to the reduced interest of users in outdated articles.
Based on our analysis, we develop a recommender component implementing a
most-popular algorithm. Due to the di erences in the number of articles and
average lifetime of the items from di erent portals, we use a meta-recommender
architecture having a special component for each domain as shown in Figure 5.</p>
        <p>plista</p>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-1">
          <title>NewsREEL</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-2">
          <title>Request</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-3">
          <title>Sender</title>
          <p>I
P
A
P
R
O
I
P
A
P
R
O
sbaed iIanD
iton dom
a e
leg th
de on</p>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-4">
          <title>Most-Popular</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-5">
          <title>Recommender domain 1</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-6">
          <title>Most-Popular</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-7">
          <title>Recommender domain 2</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-8">
          <title>Most-Popular</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-2-9">
          <title>Recommender</title>
          <p>domain N
online log data
aggregator
itIeDm coutn</p>
          <p>D
I
m
e
it
map sorted by count list of itemIDs
(popularity statistic) (insertion order,</p>
          <p>no duplicates)
online log database
online log viewer</p>
          <p>The implemented strategy We implement a most-popular algorithm by analyzing
the most recent impressions with regard to their popularity for each domain. For
this purpose we use a map (impressionID, number of impressions) storing
the number of impressions for each itemID. In order to limit the size of the
map, we use a queue (\ fo"), storing the articles' IDs in insertion order. If the
maximal number of keys in the map is reached, the oldest key from the map
is removed. We implement the map based on a concurrent skip list containing
the impressions in descending order of the number of impressions. This data
structure has several advantages:
(1) The map supports the concurrent access enabling the use of threading. In
addition to that, no explicit synchronization is needed. This ensures that an
update of the impression statistic does not block recommendation requests. This
is important to ensure that we can correspond to the tight time limits for the
requests.
(2) Since the map contains the itemIDs sorted by popularity, recommendation
requests are e ciently answered by returning the head of the list of itemIDs.
This minimizes the complexity of providing recommendations.</p>
          <p>Discussion In this section we motivated the use of a most-popular model. We
presented our online log viewer visualizing the characteristic features as well as
the impression statistics for the most popular articles. Moreover, we presented
our meta-recommender architecture combining recommender components
customized for the di erent news portals (\domains"). Each recommender
component uses a most-popular algorithm tailored for the characteristics of the speci c
portal.</p>
          <p>The implementation of the most-popular recommender components uses highly
optimized data structures allowing concurrent access due to the use of
concurrent collections. Since the potentially relevant articles are already sorted by
popularity, the e cient handling of requests is assured. The meta-recommender
architecture ensures that the optimal window size for each portal is used
handling the removal of outdated articles. The suitable window size is determined
based on the analysis of the log data.
4</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Evaluation</title>
      <p>We benchmark the implemented news recommender system both in the online
and the o ine task.</p>
      <p>Online Evaluation Our recommender participated actively in the online
evaluation from April 14th until May 20th, 2016. We restrict our evaluation to the
domain 35774 due to the observation that 96% of all requests belong to this
domain (cf. Fig. 6). The number of requests for the other publishers is small so
that the signi cance of the results for the other domains is limited.</p>
      <p>Table 1 summarizes the results obtained in the online task. The results show
that the implemented strategy works very reliably. Our recommender handled a
large number of requests and, having a median response rate of 99.4%, signi
cantly outperformed the baseline recommender.</p>
      <p>In order to analyze the online task in detail, we plot the CTR on a daily
basis. Figure 7 shows the number of requests and the reached CTR. The results
show that the CTR is stable. On May 3rd, 2016, the CTR dropped signi cantly.
Since the recommender has not been changed during the entire evaluation, the
decrease must be caused by external factors that cannot be in uenced by the
recommender algorithms. In order to handle external changes, the recommender
should be able to adapt itself to new environments.</p>
      <p>O ine Task In addition to the online evaluation, we also benchmark the
performance of the recommender system o ine based on a simulated stream. We
replay the data stream recorded in one week (May 9th - May 15th, 2016) and
analyze the o ine CTR as well as the response time.</p>
      <p>Figure 8 visualizes the o ine CTR of our algorithm. Compared to the online
CTR the o ine CTR is slightly lower. This indicates that our algorithm is
optimized for the online reward model. The user impressions (used as reward
model in the o ine evaluation) seem to follow di erent patterns than the user
clicks (used as reward model in the online evaluation). The di erences between
the online and the o ine evaluation results could be explained by the observation
that user impressions cover a wide spectrum of articles but users only click on
recommendations if special (very popular) articles are recommended.</p>
      <p>We also evaluated the response time of the recommender algorithm. The
evaluation has been executed on a laptop running Windows 7 having an Intel R
CoreTM i7-3520M 2.9GHz CPU and 16 GB of RAM. Figure 9 shows the
response time for di erent levels of concurrent requests. The results show that the
implementation e ciently handles requests.
1.6%
1.4%
1.2%
1.0%
0.8%
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%</p>
      <p>Requests
Clicks</p>
      <p>CTR
# correct recommendations *100
# provided recommendations
offline CTR
3%
2%
1%
0%</p>
      <p>R
T
C
e
n
lif
f
o
In this paper we presented our news recommender system tailored to the
speci c requirements of the NewsREEL challenge. Our system uses a most-popular
recommender approach that adapts to the characteristics of the di erent news
portals (\publishers"). In order to motivate that a most-popular algorithm is
an e cient solution for the news recommendation task, we developed an online
tool visualizing the most popular articles and their characteristics. Our analysis
showed that the most popular articles cover a high fraction of the user-item
interactions. The user behavior di ers between the di erent portals. This has been the
motivation for developing a recommender implementing a meta-recommender
architecture combining components that are optimized for the relevant news
portals.</p>
      <p>In order to handle the problem of continuous changes in the user interests,
we implemented a sliding window approach ensuring that only the most recent
popular articles are recommended. Outdated articles are automatically removed
from the set of candidates considered when computing recommendations. The
evaluation showed that the implemented recommender outperforms the
baseline for all considered domains. The error rate is very low. The response time
requirements are reliably ful lled.</p>
      <p>The analysis of the user behavior showed that the optimal window size
considered while computing the most popular news articles depends on the news
portal. As future work we plan to apply a context-aware optimization of the
window size in order to take into account the day of the week (working day,
weekend, and holiday) and the time of the day. Furthermore, we plan to
implement algorithms predicting what articles will be popular in the next hour. For
this purpose we identify current trends and extrapolate these trends into the
near future.
The research leading to these results was performed in the CrowdRec project,
which has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework
Programme FP7/2007-2013 under grant agreement No. 610594.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
            <surname>Ahn</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>A new similarity measure for collaborative ltering to alleviate the new user cold-start problem</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information Science</source>
          ,
          <volume>178</volume>
          :
          <fpage>37</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>51</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2008</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Bandari</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Asur</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B. A.</given-names>
            <surname>Huberman</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <source>The Pulse of News in Social Media: Forecasting Popularity</source>
          .
          <year>2012</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Cacheda</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
            <surname>Carneiro</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Fernandez</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
            <surname>Formoso</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Comparison of collaborative ltering algorithms: Limitations of current techniques and proposals for scalable, high-performance recommender systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>ACM Trans. Web</source>
          ,
          <volume>5</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):2:
          <issue>1</issue>
          {2:
          <fpage>33</fpage>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Feb</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J. L.</given-names>
            <surname>Herlocker</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
            <surname>Konstan</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>L. G.</given-names>
            <surname>Terveen</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J. T.</given-names>
            <surname>Riedl</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Evaluating collaborative ltering recommender systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. (TOIS)</source>
          ,
          <volume>22</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):5{
          <fpage>53</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2004</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Hopfgartner</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Brodt</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Seiler</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Kille</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Lommatzsch</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Larson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Turrin</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Sereny</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Benchmarking news recommendations: The clef newsreel use case</article-title>
          .
          <source>SIGIR Forum</source>
          ,
          <volume>49</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ):
          <volume>129</volume>
          {
          <fpage>136</fpage>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jan</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2016</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Hopfgartner</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Kille</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Lommatzsch</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Plumbaum</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Brodt</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Heintz</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <source>Benchmarking News Recommendations in a Living Lab</source>
          , pages
          <volume>250</volume>
          {
          <fpage>267</fpage>
          . Springer International Publishing,
          <year>2014</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Kille</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Brodt</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Heintz</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Hopfgartner</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Lommatzsch</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>J. Seiler. NEWSREEL</surname>
          </string-name>
          <year>2014</year>
          :
          <article-title>Summary of the news recommendation evaluation lab</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Working Notes for CLEF 2014 Conference</source>
          , pages
          <volume>790</volume>
          {
          <fpage>801</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Kille</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Hopfgartner</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Brodt</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Heintz</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>The plista dataset</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 2013 International News Recommender Systems Workshop and Challenge</source>
          ,
          <source>NRS '13</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>16</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>23</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2013</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Kille</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Lommatzsch</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
            <surname>Gebremeskel</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Hopfgartner</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Larson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Seiler</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Malagoli</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Sereny</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Brodt</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and A. de Vries.
          <article-title>Overview of NewsREEL'16: Multi-dimensional Evaluation of Real-Time Stream- Recommendation Algorithms</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Experimental IR Meets Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Interaction 7th Intl. Conf. of the CLEF Association, CLEF</source>
          <year>2016</year>
          , Evora, Portugal, September 5-
          <issue>8</issue>
          ,
          <year>2016</year>
          ., LNCS 9822. Springer,
          <year>2016</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Kille</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Lommatzsch</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Turrin</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Sereny</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Larson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Brodt</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Seiler</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Hopfgartner</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Stream-Based Recommendations: Online and O ine Evaluation as a Service</article-title>
          , pages
          <volume>497</volume>
          {
          <fpage>517</fpage>
          . Springer International Publishing, Cham,
          <year>2015</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Lommatzsch</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Albayrak</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Real-time recommendations for user-item streams</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. of the 30th Symposium On Applied Computing, SAC</source>
          <year>2015</year>
          , SAC '
          <volume>15</volume>
          , pages
          <fpage>1039</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>1046</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2015</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Lops</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Gemmis</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
            <surname>Semeraro</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <source>Content-Based Recommender Systems: State of the Art and Trends</source>
          , chapter
          <volume>3</volume>
          , pages
          <fpage>73</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>105</fpage>
          . Springer,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
            <surname>Szabo</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B. A.</given-names>
            <surname>Huberman</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Predicting the popularity of online content</article-title>
          .
          <source>Communications of the ACM</source>
          ,
          <volume>53</volume>
          (
          <issue>8</issue>
          ):
          <volume>80</volume>
          {
          <fpage>88</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2010</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Z.-K. Zhang</surname>
            , C. Liu,
            <given-names>Y.-C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zhang</surname>
            , and
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zhou</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Solving the cold-start problem in recommender systems with social tags</article-title>
          .
          <source>EPL (Europhysics Letters)</source>
          ,
          <volume>92</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>28002</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2010</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>