<!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>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>October</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Inferring Contextual User Profiles - Improving Recommender Performance</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Alan Said</string-name>
          <email>alan.said@dai-lab.de</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Ernesto W. De Luca Sahin Albayrak</string-name>
          <email>ernesto.deluca@dai-lab.de</email>
          <email>ernesto.deluca@dai-lab.de sahin.albayrak@dai-lab.de</email>
          <email>sahin.albayrak@dai-lab.de</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>TU Berlin TU Berlin, DAI Lab DAI Lab</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>TU Berlin, DAI Lab</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2011</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>23</volume>
      <issue>2011</issue>
      <abstract>
        <p>In this paper we present the concept of inferred contextual user pro les (CUPs) which extends the traditional user prole de nition by describing the user in a given situation, or context. The approach is evaluated in the scope of movie recommendation. In our evaluation, we infer two CUPs for each user, and use only one of the pro les, instead of the full user pro le for recommending movies. We evaluate the model on a data snapshot from the Moviepilot movie recommendation website, with results showing a substantial improvement in terms of precision, recall and mean average precision.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>eol&gt;recommender systems</kwd>
        <kwd>collaborative ltering</kwd>
        <kwd>experimentation</kwd>
        <kwd>context-awareness</kwd>
        <kwd>user modeling</kwd>
        <kwd>information retrieval</kwd>
        <kwd>human factors</kwd>
        <kwd>movie recommendation</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1. INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>
        Recommender systems have become a popular component
in online services to help and guide users in information
retrieval oriented tasks [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. Frequently, recommender
systems infer the preferences of users based on a priori data, i.e.
the already consumed data. Collaborative Filtering (CF)
models are the de facto standard in when it comes to
recommendation of frequently consumed items, e.g. movies,
books, etc [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14 ref16">14, 16</xref>
        ]. CF calculates the relevance of an item
for a user based on other users' rating information on items
co-rated by the user and his or her peers. CF approaches
are commonly categorized as either model-based or
memorybased [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ]. In this work we focus on the latter, which
creates item prediction for a user by nding users similar to
that user (in terms of co-rated items), a so-called
neighborhood. The information from the neighborhood is then used
to predict items not rated by the user which should be of
interest. Memory-based, or neighborhood-based approaches
commonly use measures such as the Pearson correlation
Coe cient or cosine similarity to create the neighborhoods [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ].
However, in some situations, approaches using only the
historical usage information of users are not capable of
identifying relevant items [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ], or approaches utilizing other
information can provide better recommendations. Instead, if
at rst identifying the situation, the context, a system can
provide tailored recommendations for the speci c context,
provided information about it is available.
      </p>
      <p>
        In order to create a context-aware recommendation model,
one needs to de ne the concept of context. In this work we
use Dey's widely-accepted de nition: "Context is any
information that can be used to characterize the situation of an
entity" [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ]. Here, the entity is understood as an item which
can be in uenced by contextual parameters that describe
the state of the user and item during consumption.
Context-aware systems commonly use a prede ned static set
of contexts in order to generate recommendations for the
speci c situation, e.g. weekday, season, time of day [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13 ref4">4, 13</xref>
        ].
We propose an approach for automatic context-inference in
the scope of movie recommendation, based on the time of
a rating event and the information on whether or not the
rated movie is still shown in the cinema.
      </p>
      <p>
        Our approach to context-inference for recommendation is
evaluated using a dataset from the Moviepilot1 movie
recommendation website. We present an inferred Contextual
User Model (CUP), a user pro le, similar to the
\micropro le" concept by Baltrunas and Amatriain [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. Our model
infers the context of where a movie was seen (at the cinema,
or at home) through a combination of movie meta data, the
dates of when a movie was shown in the cinema, and the
creation time of the rating, i.e. the time when the movie was
rated by a user. The model creates two \virtual" (context)
pro les for each user (two CUPs), the cinema CUP and the
home CUP.
The biggest di erence between our work and the related
work described in section 2 is that we infer Contextual
User Pro les automatically (i.e. split users into
contextaware sub-pro les, as shown in Figure 1), and show that even
this simple model of context-inference adds to the quality
of a recommender. The process is presented in detail in
Section 3.
      </p>
      <p>Our experiments show that when using our context model,
we can improve recommendation results signi cantly
compared to the uncontextualized preferences of users. The full
details of our evaluation and results are presented in
Section 4. The paper is concluded by a summary of the
contributions and a discussion about future work in Section 5.
Our main contribution is showing that a relatively simple
inference model based on surrounding information can be
used to boost recommendation results considerably.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2. RELATED WORK</title>
      <p>
        At the moment, recommender systems tend to use very
simplistic user models, adding new user preferences to the
existing pro les as the users interact with more items (e.g. rate
new movies, buy new books, etc.). But these approaches
often ignore the "situated action" of the user. Situated action
states that users who interact with a system in a particular
context have items that are relevant within that context may
nd the same items irrelevant in a di erent context [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ].
As stated by Mobasher [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ], context plays an important role
in psychology for human memory as well as in linguistics
for disambiguation purposes. Research in intelligent
information systems has also shown that incorporating context,
or situational awareness, in the recommendation process
increases the performance and perceived usefulness of
recommender systems [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Adomavicius and Tuzhilin [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ] divide context-aware
recommender systems (CARS) into three types:
1. Contextual Pre-Filtering, where context directs data
selection
2. Contextual Post-Filtering, where context is used for
ltering recommendations computed by traditional
approaches.
3. Contextual Modeling, where context is directly
integrated into the model
Contextual pre- ltering can be achieved by using
\micropro les" where a single user pro le is split into several,
possibly overlapping, contextual sub-pro les, each representing
the user in one or several particular contexts [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. Here, the
recommendation process uses these micro-pro les, not only
a single user model. The performance is shown to be better
than that of traditional Collaborative Filtering methods.
Contextual post- ltering is applied within traditional
approaches, while contextual modeling directly involves the
model, e.g. adapting a generic tensor factorization approach.
An example of this is the tensor factorization-based
Collaborative Filtering method, by Karatzoglou et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ], which
allows a exible and generic integration of contextual
information using a User-Item-Context N-dimensional tensor for
modeling data, instead of the traditional User-Item matrix.
In their \Multiverse Recommendation" model, every di
erent type of context is considered as an additional dimension
in the data representation, extending the user-item matrix
to a tensor. The factorization of this tensor leads to a
compact data model that can be used to provide context-aware
recommendations.
      </p>
      <p>
        Bogers [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ], presents a movie recommendation algorithm,
ContextWalk, based on taking random walks on the
contextual graph. In addition to the common CF user-item
relations, this algorithm allows the inclusion of di erent types
of contextual features, such as actors, genres, directors, etc.
It supports other recommendation tasks with the same
random walk model without the need for alteration or
retraining, e.g. recommending interesting movies or actors for a
speci c group of users.
      </p>
      <p>
        Contextual user modeling, and context-awareness in general
have been hot topics during recent years with numerous
papers [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13 ref17 ref4">4, 13, 17</xref>
        ], workshops [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref3">3, 10</xref>
        ], etc. covering the eld.
However, the topic is not new, and has been touched upon
for the better part of the last 20 years. One of the earliest
systems using the concept of location-based context, the
Active Badge Location System by Want et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ], introduced
this type of context-awareness as a means of providing
services to people in an o ce environment. Similar systems
have been subsequently put to use both in research and the
industry, Bokun and Zielinski [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ] for instance, created the
Next Generation Active Badge System which broadcast the
location of the badge wearers. Abowd et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] wrote about
context for mobile environments in the form of location for
automated tour guides already in 1997.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3. CONTEXTUAL USER MODELING</title>
      <p>Given an analysis of user modeling in the scope of
recommender systems, in this paper, we choose to extend the
term to contextual user modeling as our focus is on de ning
context-aware user pro les (CUPs). Each CUP is speci c
for the situations a user encounters.</p>
      <p>
        The context pro le model we describe is based on the
location and time, the context (or \situated action" [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ]), in
which a user watches a movie. Given a set of users, movies
and ratings with timestamps of when the rating event
occurred, we infer the context of the rating event. We de ne
two CUPs, home and cinema and assign each user's movie
ratings to one of these as shown in Figure 1. Assignment of
ratings is based on the assumption that movies rated within
two months of their cinema premiere date have been seen
in the cinema2, we consequently assume movies rated at a
later point in time are assumed to have been seen at home.
Having created two CUPs for every user, we can now use
a collaborative ltering approach to recommend movies for
2the speci c time a movie is shown in the cinema usually
varies depending on the number of visitors, however the time
between the cinema and home release of a movie usually
varies between 4 weeks - 4 months [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ], 2 months being typical
for German cinema
each of the CUPs based on the ratings in each speci c
context.
      </p>
      <p>ma
mb
mc
md
me
ui uj uk um ul
1 3</p>
      <p>4</p>
      <p>
        This type of modeling is in agreement with the pre- ltered
context-awareness concept discussed in Section 2. It is
also related to the time-based \micro-pro les" approach
presented by Baltrunas and Amatriain [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ] where users are
also divided into sub-pro les, however these sub-pro les are
based on the time of the event only, without taking its
location and item speci c meta data into consideration.
The rationale for this division is the assumption that people
have di erent rating pro les, or di erent tastes, based on
where and when they see a movie, consequently the movies
which should be recommended to users should be di erent
depending on how the movie will be consumed.
      </p>
      <p>Our model is built upon the assumption that users rate
movies they have seen within a short amount of time from
the time of viewing, i.e. generally not saving up ratings for,
rather rating them continuously . This is supported by the
general rating trend shown in Figure 2. The graph shows the
average number of ratings per user from the initial month of
registration for both the subset used in our experiments
(introduced in Section 4.1) and the full dataset. As some users
stop using the service, the number decreases over time. The
high amount of ratings in the beginning indicates that users
rate a \larger than normal" amount of movies just after
registration, in order to create their pro les, but after one or
two initial rating sessions, the average number of ratings per
user per month stabilizes at between 10 and 12. There are
no extreme anomalies (peaks) in the curve, would there be
any, these would indicate accumulated rating sessions.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4. EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS</title>
      <p>We evaluated our contextual user pro le model on a
dataset from the German movie recommendation
community Moviepilot. It should be noted that the algorithm itself
is not the focus of our evaluation, rather the concept of
inferred contextual user pro les.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>4.1 Dataset</title>
      <p>The Moviepilot website contains information and news
about movies, actors, directors, etc., as well as the ratings
of movies seen by its users. One of the services o ered by
Moviepilot are movie recommendations. Each user is
presented with a set of movies which should be of interest.
These recommendations are based on the users', and their
peers', previously rated movies.</p>
      <p>This dataset is a subset of the full, un ltered, data that
creates the basis for the Moviepilot website. The dataset was
obtained directly from Moviepilot, thus eliminating any
inconsistencies which might be the result of crawling a website
like this. The dataset contains ratings by 10; 000 randomly
selected users who have rated at least one movie. In
addition to the ratings, the dataset also contains information on
when movies had their cinema premieres. The total
number of ratings in our subset is 1; 539; 393 spread over four
years. The total number of ratings in Moviepilot over the
same amount of time is more than 7 million. Figure 2 shows
the number of ratings per month in both datasets. The
ratings are stored on a 0 to 100 scale with 0 being the lowest
and 100 being the highest. The scale the users are presented
with is 0.0 to 10.0.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>4.2 Experimental Setup</title>
      <p>
        The algorithm used to produce the recommendations is
based on collaborative ltering [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. We evaluate our results
on a subset of 10; 000 randomly selected users due to the
long running times of the experiments when the full dataset
was used. Even for this subset, each experiment took circa
3 hours to complete on a 2.4GHz dual core PC.
For the experiments, 50 training and evaluation sets each for
the original and for the contextual user pro les were created.
The evaluation sets consisted of circa 5000 ratings for 500
randomly selected CUPs for the contextualized evaluation.
Analysing the 10; 000 users in our dataset, we were able to
identify 7; 487 cinema CUPs and 4; 670 home CUPs -
meaning that not all users seem to rate movies in both contexts.
For the uncontextualized case, the CUPs were merged into
the original user, meaning a fewer number of columns in the
input matrix (see Figure 1(a)). The merged columns have
roughly twice as many ratings each though3.
      </p>
      <p>In order to avoid problems related to cold start, for both
users and items, we decided that users in the evaluation sets
had to have rated at least 30 movies. For each of these
users, 10 movies having been rated with a value above the
user's average rating were extracted into the evaluation set
(i.e. the set of True Positive recommendations). The rest
of the ratings were used for training. The recommendation
algorithm was run one time each for the 50 pairs of original
and CUP datasets. The results presented in this paper are
averaged over all 50 runs.</p>
      <p>
        The recommendation algorithm used in our experiments was
K-Nearest Neighbor using the Pearson Correlation Coe
cient as the neighbor similarity measure. Experiments were
performed for K = 150. We evaluate our recommendations
with the Mean Average Precision (MAP), Precision at N,
and Recall at N measures. These measures where chosen
since they are well-known and widely-used in the eld of
3which should bias the results positively for the original
setup as the number of true positives becomes twice as high
(at most) for the merged users compared to the CUP's.
100
r
e
s
u
re 80
p
s
g
itan 60
fr
o
# 40
20
0
0
Subset used
Full dataset
12
# of months after first rating
24
36
Recommender Systems and Information Retrieval,
providing a statistically sound estimate of the recommendation
quality [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ].
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>4.3 Results</title>
      <p>
        Figure 3 shows the precision levels obtained in our
experiments. The recommendations using the contextualized user
pro les outperform the original dataset by 200% when
recommending one item only in terms of average precision. The
approach consistently outperforms the baseline until the
recommended set reaches circa 50 items. In terms of recall,
shown in Figure 4, the CUP approach consistently
outperforms the baseline. When looking at each CUP separately
we see that the home CUP outperforms all other approaches
(contextual and not contextual) by even more. The
performance in terms of recall is similar, however the original
users pro les never seem to be able to outperform the CUPs.
When looking at MAP, shown in Table 1, the improvement
is somewhat smaller, which is expected given the fact that
precision is higher for the original user pro les at high N's.
The observed results con rm the assumption that the
location and situation (\situated action" [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ]) in uences the
consumer in such a way that the taste (i.e. rating value)
differs from situation to situation. This con rms the notion of
users having separate rating pro les depending on the
combination of where, how and when the movie is seen. More
importantly, the performance of a recommender system can
be improved considerably if this information is used.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>5. CONCLUSION</title>
      <p>In this paper we presented a method for automatic
contextualization of rating events in a movie recommendation
scenario, in order to create contextual user pro les, CUPs.
By using the date of the rating, and the information on how
new a movie was at the time of rating, we were able to infer
the venue (at home, or at the cinema) in which a movie was
seen.</p>
      <p>We evaluated the inferred contextual user pro les and were
288%
206% 204%
0,018
0,016
0,014
0,012
iino 0,01
sce
rP0,008
0,004
0,002</p>
      <p>0
0,006 100%</p>
      <p>187%
165%</p>
      <p>165%
100%
100%
186%</p>
      <p>138%
146% 145%
100% 99%
99%</p>
      <p>Original Profiles
CUPs
CUPs Home</p>
      <p>CUPs Cinema
100% 103%
87% 86%
1
5
50</p>
      <p>100
able to considerably improve recommendation results in
terms of precision, recall and mean average precision.
Results indicate that automatic contextualization of user
proles into CUPs a ects the quality of recommendations
positively. We showed that, in a movie recommendation
scenario, the venue and time of a consumption as well as the
\freshness" of the item is re ected in the rating behavior of
users and that this information can be used for
recommendation purposes.</p>
      <p>The situation in which users consume a particular product,
has an e ect on their taste or rating behavior. However,
the context covered in this work needs to be extended and
further researched to gain more insight into the way
contextualized user pro les should be inferred, managed and used.
For instance, the pro les explored in this work are mutually
exclusive, which, in the presented recommendation scenario,
seems plausible, as the location of an event can only be
singular. If the context pro le would be extended to include
factors such as company, mood or ambiance of the venue,
280%</p>
      <p>11732%59%
0,00E+00 100%
% improvement</p>
      <p>286%
2,00E-02
ll
cae
R
1,50E-02
1,00E-02
5,00E-03</p>
      <p>Recommender</p>
      <sec id="sec-8-1">
        <title>Original users</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-8-2">
        <title>Contextual user pro les</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-8-3">
        <title>Home Context</title>
        <p>Cinema Context
5:26E
6:05E
7:97E
6:00E
3
3
3
3
the assumption on mutual exclusiveness of the contexts may
need to be relaxed.</p>
        <p>Our current work includes the in-depth analysis of data in
order to be able to accurately identify other contexts, infer
them from implicit relations and subsequently use them for
recommendation purposes.</p>
        <p>In conclusion, it appears that even trivial context inference
models can be used to considerably improve recommender
systems quality, without adding much complexity to the
recommendation algorithms themselves.</p>
        <p>In this paper we have covered the topic of inferred
Contextual User Pro les (CUPs), and showed that, even with
rather simple inference models, there is much to gain in
terms of recommendation quality. The contexts covered in
this work have been one related to watching movies in the
comfort of one's home, and one where the watching takes
place at a cinema. Both contexts improve recommendation
quality considerably.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</title>
      <p>The authors would like to express their gratitude to the
Moviepilot team who contributed to this work with dataset,
relevant insights and support.</p>
      <p>The work in this paper was conducted in the scope of the
KMulE project which was sponsored by the German Federal
Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi).</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G. D.</given-names>
            <surname>Abowd</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C. G.</given-names>
            <surname>Atkeson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Hong</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Long</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Kooper</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Pinkerton</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Cyberguide: a mobile context-aware tour guide', Wirel</article-title>
          . Netw.,
          <volume>3</volume>
          , (
          <issue>10</issue>
          /
          <year>1997</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
            <surname>Adomavicius</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Tuzhilin</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Context-Aware Recommender</surname>
            <given-names>Systems</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <volume>217</volume>
          {
          <fpage>257</fpage>
          , Springer,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
            <surname>Adomavicius</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Tuzhilin</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Berkovsky</surname>
          </string-name>
          , E. W. De Luca,
          <article-title>and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Said</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Context-awareness in recommender systems: research workshop and movie recommendation challenge', in RecSys 2010</article-title>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
            <surname>Baltrunas</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
            <surname>Amatriain</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Towards Time-Dependant recommendation based on implicit feedback'</article-title>
          ,
          <source>in CARS</source>
          <year>2009</year>
          , (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Berkovsky</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Said</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and E. W. De Luca, eds.
          <source>CAMRa '10. ACM</source>
          ,
          <year>2010</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Bogers</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Movie recommendation using random walks over the contextual graph'</article-title>
          ,
          <source>in CARS</source>
          <year>2010</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          [7]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
            <surname>Bokun</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Zielinski</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Active badges{the next generation'</article-title>
          , Linux J.,
          <volume>10</volume>
          /
          <year>1998</year>
          , (
          <year>1998</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          [8]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J S</given-names>
            <surname>Breese</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D</given-names>
            <surname>Heckerman</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C</given-names>
            <surname>Kadie</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Empirical analysis of predictive algorithms for collaborative ltering</article-title>
          , volume
          <volume>461</volume>
          ,
          <year>43a</year>
          ^
          <fpage>52</fpage>
          , San Francisco, CA,
          <year>1998</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          [9]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Ben</given-names>
            <surname>Child</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Closing the window on the multiplex j ben child j guardian</article-title>
          .co.uk. http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2010/ may/28/cinema-window
          <article-title>-dvd-release-multiplexes (retrieved 07/</article-title>
          <year>2011</year>
          ), May
          <year>2010</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          [10]
          <string-name>
            <surname>E. W. De Luca</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Said</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Bohmer, and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Michahelles</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `Workshop on context
          <article-title>-awareness in retrieval and recommendation', in IUI</article-title>
          . ACM, (
          <year>2011</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          [11]
          <string-name>
            <surname>A. K. Dey</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Understanding and using context'</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Personal Ubiquitous Comput., 5</source>
          , (
          <issue>01</issue>
          /
          <year>2001</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          [12]
          <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</source>
          . Syst.,
          <volume>22</volume>
          , (
          <issue>01</issue>
          /
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          [13]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Karatzoglou</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
            <surname>Amatriain</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
            <surname>Baltrunas</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            <surname>Oliver</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Multiverse recommendation: n-dimensional tensor factorization for context-aware collaborative ltering', in RecSys 2010</article-title>
          . ACM, (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          [14]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
            <surname>Linden</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Smith</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>and J</surname>
          </string-name>
          . York, `Amazon.
          <article-title>com recommendations: item-to-item collaborative ltering'</article-title>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Internet</surname>
            <given-names>Computing</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , IEEE,
          <volume>7</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ), (jan/feb
          <year>2003</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          [15]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Mobasher</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Contextual user modeling for recommendation'</article-title>
          ,
          <source>in Keynote at the 2nd Workshop on Context-Aware Recommender Systems</source>
          , (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          [16]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Moviepilot</surname>
          </string-name>
          . Wie funktioniert moviepilot? http://www.moviepilot.de/pages/faq#wie_ funktioniert_moviepilot (retrieved 03/
          <year>2011</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          [17]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Said</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>Identifying and utilizing contextual data in hybrid recommender systems', in RecSys</article-title>
          . ACM, (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          [18]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Want</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
            <surname>Hopper</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>V.</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Falca~o, and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Gibbons</surname>
          </string-name>
          , `
          <article-title>The active badge location system'</article-title>
          ,
          <source>ACM Trans. Inf</source>
          . Syst.,
          <volume>10</volume>
          , (
          <issue>01</issue>
          /
          <year>1992</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>