<!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>Tag and Neighbour Based Recommender System for Medical Events</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Karunakar Reddy Bayyapu</string-name>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Peter Dolog</string-name>
          <email>dologg@cs.aau.dk</email>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Intelligent Web and Information Systems, Aalborg University</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Computer Science Department Selma LagerlÄofs Vej 300 DK-9220 Aalborg</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="DK">Denmark</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2010</year>
      </pub-date>
      <fpage>14</fpage>
      <lpage>24</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>This paper presents an extension of a multifactor recommendation approach based on user tagging with term neighbours. Neighbours of words in tag vectors and documents provide for hitting larger set of documents and not only those matching with direct tag vectors or content of the documents. Tag popularity, tag representativeness and tag similarity are applied similarly as in the original approach but also to neighbours. By doing so, we treat the documents which have been added to the result set by considering word neighbours in the same way as the others. This provides an advantage in the situations where the quality of tags is lower. We discuss the approach on the examples from the existing Medworm system to indicate the usefulness of the approach.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Search systems typically return a ranked list of web pages on di®erent aspects
of the same topic in the returned list in a response to a users request. Recently,
social activities such as tagging have emerged mostly to help people to organize
resources of their personal interest on the web. The tagging information has been
applied to help information retrieval and recommender systems. Although some
successful applications have been developed (see, for instance,[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]), implementing
and extending a hybrid tag-based recommender system with personalization for
social bookmarking systems is still a challenge. Many applications would bene¯t
from tag based analysis, which is su±ciently general to be useful in a wide range
of applications, is already performed.
      </p>
      <p>Tags in Medical bookmarking systems such as M edworm are usually assigned
to organize and share resources on the Web. Tag clouds are weighted lists of tags.
The relative importance of a tag is visualized with bigger font size, bolder letters,
and is measured as a count of the popularity of the tag i.e. how many times users
have used it to describe a resource. Tags are generally submitted by any user
in bookmarking services such as for example http : ==medworm:com. The data
source tags provide useful information with su±cient background and context,
even though the set of tags are quite limited to provide an accurate degree of
relatedness between tags and neighbours.</p>
      <p>
        Furthermore, the tags themselves as they appear in theM edworn system, for
example, represent multiple domains. Therefore, it is not directly applicable to
consider only tag measures. In our approach, we focus our e®orts on neighbour
objects of the tags for search and retrieval systems. Our approach combines basic
similarity calculus with external factors such as a tag popularity, tag
representativeness and closest neighbours semantic similarity, document score, semantic
similarity of tags as described in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. The proposed contribution of this paper is:
{ The extended hybrid tag based recommender system which bases the
computation on a user query,
{ Finding the closest neighbour vector of the tag from medical data source.
      </p>
      <p>The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 discusses the
problem and proposed solution on an example. Section 3 de¯nes our approach to
multi-factor recommendation with word neighbours. Section 4 discusses related
work and positions our work in this context. Section 5 discusses experimental
evaluations and outcome results. Section 6 explains analysis of experiment and
conclusions .Section 7 discusses future work.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Working example and Motivating scenario</title>
      <p>Let's consider the following scenario. If the user submits a query to the
system, the system evaluates which documents are relevant to the query and
returns a rank ordered list of documents to the users. Normally, the system
considers content of the documents or collaborative user activities as factors
to judge the relevance. Recently, tag-based approaches have been coined in the
literature as well but only in the general situations. The domain speci¯c searches
by experts usually do not hit the most relevant documents in the ¯rst top n
results. For example, the medical M edworm system gives almost 14470 records
just based on swine °u tag. However, the system does not know what exactly
user is looking for, or user doesn't know the proper words to describe what it is
that he wants. Then the returned results are often unsatisfactory.</p>
      <p>However, we could resolve this problem by proposed extension of tag and
neighbour based recommender systems for medical events. This approach searches
for the most trusted information. The traditional approach based on simple tag
based recommendation factors are not e±cient enough for domain speci¯c
systems such as M edworm due to lower relevance of user generated tags used.
Therefore, we also apply neighbours to consider wider set of documents.</p>
      <p>Figure 1 shows which kind of information M edworm can o®er to improve
the search to ¯nd information with respect to a certain aspect of a document.
One just needs to refer to its associated tags and predicted neighbours in the
corresponding documents. There are two columns depicted in the ¯gure which
represent the positions of neighbours in the text or the tag vector. By
considering one side or both sides of the neighbourhood, we can target wider space of
documents than with original query. This allows for expansion of the document
set hit by the query. Therefore, we ensure that the user will not miss important
medical events documented in a document or a blog even when it does not match
exactly the query. By applying personalization factors as in original query to
extracted neighbours, we achieve similar ranking and therefore provide a means to
access the most relevant documents.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Recommender System</title>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Concept</title>
        <p>The main concept is to achieve recommender system in medical events. The
proposed recommender system combines associated neighbours with di®erent
aspects of similarity and tags. Consequently, a hybrid recommender system
obtained integrate many independent recommendations by applying tag popularity,
tag representativeness, tag similarity and neighbours. It exploits neighbours that
are dynamically re-calculated according to the e®ectiveness of the
recommendation. The system also uses the semantic similarity between the neighbours to
calculate neighbours set. These results in°uence the ¯nal recommendation list
to re-order the rank. The process of the calculation looks as follows. First, a
users click on a tag or he submits a query. Then, the recommendation algorithm
is applied to produce a set of recommended resources. Second, this set is then
sorted by taking the user interest and tag neighbours into account and re-ranks
the results accordingly.
3.2</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Multi-Factor Recommendation with Word Neighbours</title>
        <p>
          The tag and neighbour based recommender approach based on [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ] is
calculated as:
The extended hybrid similarity score (HS),
HS(Di;Dii) = [(DsDi £ DsDii ) £ (T S(Di;Dii))] £ N S(Di;Dii) ,
where Di and Dii are a particular documents from a set of documents D. Ds
is the document score, T S is a function for measuring the tag similarity and N S
is the closest neighbour vector space. We de¯ne document score as [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ]:
Ds = Pn i=1 Representativeness(T agi),
i=1 P opularity(T agi) £ Pn
where n is the total number of existing tags in the repository and for the
de¯nitions see in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ]. Informally, each one of the factors in the above formulas is
calculated as follows:
Tag Popularity. The tag popularity is calculated as a count of occurrences of
one tag per total of resources available [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ]. We rely on the fact that the most
popular tags are like anchors to the most con¯dent resources. As a consequence,
it decreases the chance of dissatisfaction by the receivers of the recommendations.
Tag Representativeness. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ] It measures how much a tag can represent a
document it belongs to. It is believed that those tags which most appear in the
document can better represent it. The tag representativeness is measured by the
term frequency.
        </p>
        <p>
          Tag Similarity (TS). It combines the classical cosine similarity (CosSim) from
user query and information retrieval ¯eld with a semantic similarity (SemSim)
which is de¯ned in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>Cosine similarity (CosSim). The cosine similarity in our approach is a measure
between, a user query Q transformed into a tag vectore and a set of tags or
words (represented as a vector) of particular web page (W¹ ). Each word, w(ti),
in each dimension corresponds to the importance of a particular tag ti.</p>
        <p>
          The Cosine similarity (Q; wi) is calculated for every tag word resource wi 2
W¹ . As an output, this stage of the algorithm will produce a subset of resources
W 0, that have some similarity to the query tag and similarity scores for each
[
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>
          Let us assume that the user interacts with the system by selecting a query
tag and expects to receive resource recommendations. Therefore, a query is a
unit vector consisting of a single tag, and the equation is (adapted from [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
          ]):
CosSim(QDi;wDii ) = qP
        </p>
        <p>W¹ (QDi ;WDii )
t2T W¹ (QDi;WDii )
where T is the set of tags, the similarity of the selected tag to each resource
and recommends the top n., W¹ is the set of words of that particular visited web
page, Di and Dii are a particular documents from a set of web pages/documents.
Semantic Similarity (SemSim). The semantic relation between two tags is
de¯ned as follows:</p>
        <p>SemSim(s; t) = M DSim(s; t) £ OntoSim(s; t); 8s; t 2 T</p>
        <p>Where s and t are particular tags of set of tags T . MD Sim (s,t) is the
Medical Dictionary similarity score and OntoSim (s,t) is the similarity score
achieved from ontologies.</p>
        <p>
          Neighbour Semantic Similarity (NS). Calculates closest neighbour in°uence for
personalized recommendation by vector space models [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
          ]. In order to ¯nd the
nearest neighbours of the tag word, it must measure the similarity of the tag
words [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
          ], and select several words that have the highest similarity as the nearest
neighbours of the tag word. We adopt cosine similarity algorithm to measure the
similarity between word w(ti) and w(tj). If the user does not rate the words, we
can assume the rating is zero. Assuming the rating of the n-dimensional word
space of word w(ti) and w(tj) is respectively vector w(t¹i) and w(t¹j).
        </p>
        <p>The similarity between word w(ti) and w(tj) is sim(w(ti); w(tj))
sim(w(ti); w(tj)) = cos w(t¹i); w(t¹j) = kww(t¹(it¹)ik)¤¤kww(t(¹jt¹)j)k</p>
        <p>
          In this view, the solution to be addressed includes how to represent the tags
and their closest neighbours and how to use it to in°uence the activation of
user preferences. The approach is to predicted neighbours, the current visited
context is represented as (is approximated by) a set of words concepts from the
domain ontology. Ultimately, the perceived e®ect of neighbours extended hybrid
approach is that user interests that are in focus for a current context, and those
that are in the semantic scope of the ongoing user activity are considered for
personalization [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
          ].
4
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Related Work</title>
      <p>
        Tags have been recently studied in the context of recommender systems due
to various reasons. Tags are signals or labels that particular resource was
interesting for a user, and he bookmarked it as well as tagged it with a speci¯c
tag relevant for a particular situation a user was encountered in.
Recommendations of relevant events should be based on the su±cient occurrences for similar
signals expressed by tags. Therefore, di®erent similarity measures need to be
studied in this context for e®ectiveness and e±ciency. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ] argues for a solution
where tagging from social bookmarking provides a context for recommender
systems in terms of context clues from tags as well as connectivity among users to
improve the collaborative recommender system. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ] constructed a web
recommender based on large amount of public bookmark data on Social Bookmarking
systems. For means of personalization, [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ] utilizes folksonomy tags to classify
web pages and to express user's preferences. By clustering folksonomy tags, they
can adjust the abstraction level of user's preferences to the appropriate level.
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ] experiment did not measure the e±ciency of the recommendations in terms
of user satisfaction what could give us a parameter for comparison. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ] extends
a content based recommender system by deriving current and general personal
interests of users from di®erent tags according to di®erent time intervals.
However, the similarity of the tags is given by two Na?ve Bayes classi¯ers trained over
di®erent timeframes: one classi¯er predicts the user's current interest, whereas
the other classi¯er predicts the user's general interest in a bookmark. The two
classi¯ers are trained with a subset of the bookmarks created by a user. The
tags of each bookmark, converted into a "bag of words", are used as training
features. The bookmarks are recommended in the case of both two classi¯ers
predicting a bookmark as interesting. The e®ectiveness of the recommendations,
however, is totally dependent on the quality of the subset of bookmarks used for
training the classi¯ers.
      </p>
      <p>
        [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
        ] proposes a collaborative ¯ltering approach TBCF (Tag-based
Collaborative Filtering) based on the semantic distance among tags assigned by di®erent
users to improve the e®ectiveness of neighbour selection. That is, two users
could be considered similar not only if they rated the items similarly, but also
if they have similar understanding over these items. To calculate the semantic
similarity, the WordNet dictionary is being accessed to ¯nd the shortest path
connecting a tag and its synonym in the graph synsets. The semantic distance
based calculation, which might be di±cult depending on the context of users.
Special vocabularies hardly are found in general purpose dictionaries such as
WordNet. Furthermore, the WordNet lacks much data useful to support proper
name disambiguation, and it is not collaboratively edited [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ]. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ] develops a page
rank based algorithm for recommendations of resources based on preference
vectors in folksonomy systems. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ] shows the bene¯ts of using tag based pro¯les for
personalized recommendations of music on Last.fm. The purpose of tags varies
as well as tagging itself may be in°uenced by di®erent factors. For example, [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ]
studies a model for tagging evolution based on the community in°uence and
personal tendency. It shows how 4 di®erent options to display tags a®ect user's
tagging behavior. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] studies how the tags are used for search purposes. It
con¯rms that the tags can represent a di®erent purpose such as topic, self reference,
and so on and that the distribution of usage between the purposes varies across
the domains. It compares the purposes with another literature (such as [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14 ref18 ref6">6, 18,
14</xref>
        ]) where these are called di®erently.
      </p>
      <p>
        Other works such as [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ] and [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ] coined the term emergent semantics as the
semantics which emerge in communities as social agreement on tag's meaning
that the semantics is derived from its frequent use instead of the contract given
by ontologies from ontology engineering point of view. However, the approaches
based on emergent semantics are characterized by the power law which gives
a long tail of the tags of which semantics have not emerged yet. Therefore, [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]
looks at grounding of the tag relatedness with a help of WordNet.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Evaluation and Results</title>
      <p>We have conducted an experiment to preliminary assess the performance of
the recommender approach proposed in this paper. The nature of the experiment
was based on a simulation a mix of scenarios regarding the amount of pages, tags
and their neighbours. The proposed scenarios were created aiming at simulating
realistic usage of M edworm. The variables addressed by each scenario are:
{ Amount of Pages: each page has a set of tags that are compared for
processing the recommendations. Therefore, the more pages exist then more time
will be spent to calculate the similarity between the pages.
{ Amount of Tags: the similarity of the pages is given by their tags. The whole
set of tags of each page must be compared to verify which ones are similar.
{ Set of neighbours: set of neighbours are depending on similarity of the tags.</p>
      <p>The whole set of neighbours of each page must be compared with semantic
meaning of the tag.</p>
      <p>
        These variables were chosen because we are using them for calculating the
recommendations. This process is time consuming and invariably a®ects the
system performance. However, it does not mean that other factors such as page
size should not be considered[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>We found that the choice of tf ¤ idf played an important role to ¯nd tag
representativeness. In our evaluation, tf idf have identical trends, but tf idf always
provides superior results, so we have reported only results found based on those
weights. We were able to extract tag neighbours. Some samples were taken from
each dataset of neighbours to ¯nd neighbours semantic similarity using cosine
similarity. The validation was performed to measure the improvement in
recommendation. We used MedicineNet1 online free medical dictionary to measure
semantic similarity.</p>
      <p>Let's assume that given semantic similarity is '(s), where S is the semantic
similarity. We also have to de¯ne cosine similarity between the user's query and
tags ti, tj, tk, tl, etc. These tags could be in vector node of current webpage:
W¹ = f: : : ; ti; : : : ; tj; : : : ; tk; : : : ; tl : : : : : : g, where '(s) µ w¹ and '(s) \ w¹ = ;</p>
      <p>The neighbour similarity depends on the similarity of the tag words. So,
neighbour semantic similarity (NS) is subset of cosine similarity. NS can be
computed as follows:
'¹(N S) = f: : : ; ti ¡ 1; ti + 1; : : : ; tj ¡ 1; tj + 1; : : : ; tk ¡ 1; tk + 1; : : : ; tl ¡ 1; tl +
1; : : : : : : g, '¹(N S) µ w¹ and '¹(N S) » '(s):</p>
      <p>In order to test the e®ectiveness of the algorithm, we compute the factors
with a collection of documents from M edworm data source about 90 pages.
The documents were encoded with xml format, so we decided to make 466 tags
manually. Content of the pages and some tags were extracted from web sites
on the Internet. Similarly, we utilized manually generated neighbours to assign
tags to M edworm pages tagged by a particular user. Due to certain constraints,</p>
      <sec id="sec-5-1">
        <title>1 http://www.medicinenet.com</title>
        <p>we had to limit the number of user queries. We needed just adequate number
of satisfactorily di®erent pages and su±ciently di®erent assignment of tags to
them. Each test case consists of tag, neighbours, semantic factors and resource.
We consider this resource as the target results, since we know that the user is
interested in it.</p>
        <p>Here, we have one user interest query \avian °u pandemic". A simple way
to start out is by eliminating documents that do not contain all three tags
\avian", \°u", \pandemic", but in general it hits many documents. Our
algorithm distinguished relevant and irrelevant documents and tags like \avian",
\°u", \pandemic" that occur rarely and good keywords. After performing a
recommendation using both the tag and neighbours, the rank of the target resource
in the recommendation set was recorded and shown in table1.</p>
        <p>ReturnPos Document# Document score(DS) Recommedation Score(HS)</p>
        <p>As seen at Table 1 our extended hybrid based algorithm accepts a user
interest, a set of neighbours, and a selected tag. The recommendation and document
scores are from the interval between 0 and 20. As we can see, the top
recommendation score is 14.53 (72.65% accuracy). It means that the particular document
is the most relevant to users query. Result positions 2, 3, 4 are also relevant
to user query but not most relevant when comparing to position 1. Position 5
document got mixed results and it is partially related to the query. This result
was not considered excellent but satisfactory since our recommendations relied
basically on syntax similarity of the tags.
6</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Discussions and Conclusions</title>
      <p>Categorized M edworm is the application of medical RSS feeds 2 to better
target the delivery of health care, facilitate the discovery of new products, and
helps to determine a person's predisposition to a particular disease or
condition through web. In this recommender systems, the extended hybrid algorithm</p>
      <sec id="sec-6-1">
        <title>2 http://www.medworm.com/rss/aboutmedworm.php</title>
        <p>
          can perform tasks such as discovering documents (much like the web robots),
ranking documents, ¯ltering them, and automatically routing useful and
interesting information to users and it has learning and adaptation capabilities. In
fact, the extended hybrid algorithm perfectly suits information discovery and
retrieval in the web. For example, information discovery and ranking can be
handled by document score which depends on the tag popularity and tag
representativeness. Another tag similarity can specialize in indexing, yet another
like neighbours similarity can implement an information retrieval, and so forth.
Applying these techniques to the web pages/documents, retrieved by a search
tool could substantially weed out unrelated documents and improve the ranking
quality of the remaining page/documents [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>As per our experiment, the user has tagged several medical object web
resources with the tag \°u". If a user selects that tag, the system should
recommend resources concerning the number of records about the \°u". Certainly in
addition, another \°u" related documents may have been tagged with
alternative tags: disease, swine, H1N1, avian, bird °u, in°uenza, °u attacks, respiratory
problems, pandemic, symptoms, lung infection, etc. These resources may have
been tagged with \°u" and may not have been \°u" but they should still be
made available to a user. The recommendation strategies must also be adapted
to deal with the neighbours. Typically, recommender systems have dealt with
two dimensions: users query and object neighbours semantic similarity. Consider
again the \°u" related topics. After selecting \°u" the system may recommend
resources only related by semantic similarities of neighbours. User may notice
as of his query \avian °u pandemic", the \avian", \°u", and \pandemic" are
related tags. These are generated by the closest neighbour semantic objects.</p>
        <p>Finally, user may notice resources in Medworm's pro¯le dealing with the
medical neighbour objects, and view one of those resources as his priority is
most trusted information in the top position.
7</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>Future Work</title>
      <p>The evaluation of the system provided some supplementary conclusions,
namely, a recommendation performed with association neighbours appeared to
be the most useful but only positive in°uence neighbours. Future work will focus
on positive and negative neighbours and tag similarity i.e. sentiment analysis. It
would bene¯t the system to utilize such opinions and to lower the score of bad
results, even if other strategies show them as recommendable.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>Acknowledgments</title>
      <p>This work is partially supported by the European Union under the IST
project M-Eco (http://www.meco-project.eu).</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1. Kerstin Bischo®,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Claudiu</surname>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Firan</surname>
            , Wolfgang Nejdl, and
            <given-names>Raluca</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paiu</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Can all tags be used for search</article-title>
          ? In James G. Shanahan et al., editor,
          <source>Proc. of the 17th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management</source>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>CIKM</surname>
          </string-name>
          <year>2008</year>
          , pages
          <fpage>193</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>202</fpage>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Napa</surname>
            <given-names>Valley</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , California, USA,
          <year>October 2008</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Ciro</given-names>
            <surname>Cattuto</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Dominik Benz, Andreas Hotho, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Gerd</given-names>
            <surname>Stumme</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Semantic grounding of tag relatedness in social bookmarking systems</article-title>
          . In Amit P. Sheth et al., editor,
          <source>The Semantic Web - ISWC 2008, Proc. of the 7th Intl. Semantic Web Conference, ISWC</source>
          <year>2008</year>
          , volume
          <volume>5318</volume>
          of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages
          <volume>615</volume>
          {
          <fpage>631</fpage>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Karlsruhe</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Germany,
          <year>October 2008</year>
          . Springer.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            <surname>Dolbear</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Hobson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Vallet</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Fernndez</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>I. Cantador</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Castells</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Personalised multimedia summaries</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Semantic Multimedia and Ontologies Part III</source>
          .
          <year>2008</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Frederico</given-names>
            <surname>Duarao</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Peter</given-names>
            <surname>Dolog</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Extending a hybrid tag-based recommender system with personalization</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Accepted for ACM Symposium on Applied Computing</source>
          <year>2010</year>
          , Lausane, Switzerland,
          <year>2010</year>
          . ACM Press.
          <article-title>Accepted for publication</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Claudiu</surname>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Firan</surname>
            , Wolfgang Nejdl, and
            <given-names>Raluca</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paiu</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>The bene¯t of using tagbased pro¯les</article-title>
          . In Virg¶³lio
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A. F.</given-names>
            <surname>Almeida</surname>
          </string-name>
          and Ricardo A. Baeza-Yates, editors,
          <source>Fifth Latin American Web Congress (LA-Web</source>
          <year>2007</year>
          ), pages
          <fpage>32</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>41</fpage>
          , Santiago de Chile,
          <year>November 2007</year>
          . IEEE.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Scott</surname>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Golder</surname>
            and
            <given-names>Bernardo A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Huberman</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Information Science</source>
          ,
          <volume>32</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ):
          <volume>198</volume>
          {
          <fpage>208</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Andreas</given-names>
            <surname>Hotho</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Robert</surname>
            <given-names>JÄaschke</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Christoph Schmitz, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Gerd</given-names>
            <surname>Stumme</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Information retrieval in folksonomies: Search and ranking</article-title>
          . In York Sure and John Domingue, editors,
          <source>The Semantic Web: Research and Applications, Proc. of the 3rd European Semantic Web Conference, ESWC</source>
          <year>2006</year>
          , volume
          <volume>4011</volume>
          of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages
          <volume>411</volume>
          {
          <fpage>426</fpage>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Budva</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Montenegro, June 2006. Springer.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jay</surname>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jiang</surname>
            and
            <given-names>David W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Conrath</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy</article-title>
          .
          <source>Technical report</source>
          ,
          <year>1997</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Peter</given-names>
            <surname>Mika</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Ontologies are us: A uni¯ed model of social networks and semantics</article-title>
          . Web Semant.,
          <volume>5</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):5{
          <fpage>15</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Reyn</surname>
            <given-names>Nakamoto</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Shinsuke Nakajima, Jun Miyazaki, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Shunsuke</given-names>
            <surname>Uemura</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Tagbased contextual collaborative ¯ltering</article-title>
          .
          <source>IAENG Intl. Journal of Computer Science</source>
          ,
          <volume>34</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Satoshi</surname>
            <given-names>Niwa</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Takuo Doi, and Shinichi Honiden.
          <article-title>Web page recommender system based on folksonomy mining for itng '06 submissions</article-title>
          .
          <source>In ITNG '06: Proc. of the Third Intl. Conference on Information Technology: New Generations</source>
          , pages
          <volume>388</volume>
          {
          <fpage>393</fpage>
          , Washington, DC, USA,
          <year>2006</year>
          . IEEE.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>C. Papakonstantinou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I. Panagiotou</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Verbeek</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Tag based meta-search for browsing the web: The tictag application</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings 13th Computer-Human Interaction Netherlands Conference</source>
          , Leiden, The Netherlans,
          <year>2009</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13. G. Salton,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Wong</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            <surname>Yang</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>A vector space model for automatic indexing</article-title>
          .
          <source>Communications of the ACM</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          (
          <issue>11</issue>
          ):
          <volume>613</volume>
          {
          <fpage>620</fpage>
          ,
          <year>1975</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Shilad</surname>
            <given-names>Sen</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Shyong K. Lam</surname>
            , Al Mamunur Rashid, Dan Cosley, Dan Frankowski,
            <given-names>Jeremy</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Osterhouse</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Maxwell Harper</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and John Riedl. tagging, communities, vocabulary, evolution. In Pamela J. Hinds and David Martin, editors,
          <source>Proc. of the 2006 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW</source>
          <year>2006</year>
          , pages
          <fpage>181</fpage>
          {
          <fpage>190</fpage>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ban</surname>
            <given-names>®</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Canada,
          <year>November 2006</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Shepitsen</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Gemmell</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Mobasher</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Burke</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Personalized recommendation in social tagging systems using hierarchical clustering</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Recommender systems</source>
          , pages
          <volume>259</volume>
          {
          <fpage>266</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2008</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ste</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>®en Staab. Emergent semantics</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE Intelligent Systems</source>
          ,
          <volume>17</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):
          <volume>78</volume>
          {
          <fpage>86</fpage>
          ,
          <year>2002</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pavan Kumar</surname>
            <given-names>Vatturi</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Werner Geyer, Casey Dugan,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Michael</given-names>
            <surname>Muller</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Beth</given-names>
            <surname>Brownholtz</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Tag-based ¯ltering for personalized bookmark recommendations</article-title>
          .
          <source>In CIKM '08: Proceeding of the 17th ACM conference on Information and knowledge mining</source>
          , pages
          <volume>1395</volume>
          {
          <fpage>1396</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2008</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zhichen</surname>
            <given-names>Xu</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Yun Fu, Jianchang Mao, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Difu</given-names>
            <surname>Su</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Towards the semantic web: Collaborative tag suggestions</article-title>
          .
          <source>In WWW2006: Proc. of the Collaborative Web Tagging Workshop</source>
          , Edinburgh, Scotland,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Shiwan</surname>
            <given-names>Zhao</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Nan</given-names>
            <surname>Du</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Andreas Nauerz, Xiatian Zhang, Quan Yuan, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Rongyao</given-names>
            <surname>Fu</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Improved recommendation based on collaborative tagging behaviors</article-title>
          .
          <source>In IUI '08: Proc. of the 13th Intl. conference on Intelligent user interfaces</source>
          ,
          <source>pages</source>
          <volume>413</volume>
          {
          <fpage>416</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2008</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20. L.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zheng</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Qi</surname>
            , and
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Liu</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Research and improvement of personalized recommendation algorithm based on collaborative ¯ltering</article-title>
          . IJCSNS
          <source>International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security</source>
          ,
          <volume>7</volume>
          (
          <issue>7</issue>
          ), jul
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>