skip to main content
article

Qualitative decision making in adaptive presentation of structured information

Published:01 October 2004Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We present a new approach for adaptive presentation of structured information, based on preference-based constrained optimization techniques rooted in qualitative decision-theory. In this approach, document presentation is viewed as a configuration problem whose goal is to determine the optimal presentation of a document, while taking into account the preferences of the content provider, viewer interaction with the browser, and, possibly, some layout constraints. The preferences of the content provider are represented by a CP-net, a graphical, qualitative preference model developed in Boutilier et al. [1999]. The layout constraints are represented as geometric constraints, integrated within the optimization process. We discuss the theoretical basis of our approach, as well as implemented prototype systems for Web pages and for general media-rich document presentation.

References

  1. Anderson, C. R., Domingos, P., and Weld, D. 2001. Personalizing Web sites for mobile users. In Proceedings of the 10th International World Wide Web Conference (Hong Kong). 565--575. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, C. R. and Horvitz, E. 2002. Web Montage: A dynamic personalized start page. In Proceedings of the 11th International World Wide Web Conference (Honolulu). 704--712. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Asher, N. and Morreau, M. 1995. What some generic sentences mean. In The Generic Book, G. Carlson and F. J. Pelletier, Eds. Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL, 300--338.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Bacchus, F. and Grove, A. 1996. Utility independence in qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Knowledge Representation (Cambridge, MA.), 542--552.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Badros, G. J., Borning, A., and Stuckey, P. 2001. The Cassowary linear arithmetic constraint solving algorithm. ACM Trans. Comput. Human Interact. 8, 4, 267--306. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Beaumont, I. 1994. User modeling in the interactive anatomy tutoring system ANATOMTUTOR. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 4, 1, 21--45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Berkelaar, M. 1996. lpsolve---Simplex-based code for linear and integer programming. Available online at ftp://ftp.es.ele.tue.nl/pub/lp_solve/lp_solve.tar.gz.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Bickmore, T. W. and Schilit, B. N. 1997. Digestor: Device-independent access to the World Wide Web. In Proceedings of the 6th International World Wide Web Conference (Santa Clara, CA). 655--663. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bistarelli, S., Fargier, H., Montanari, U., Rossi, F., Schiex, T., and Verfaillie, G. 1999. Semiring-based CSPs and valued CSPs: Frameworks, properties, and comparison. Constraints 4, 3, 275--316. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Bordegoni, M., Faconti, G., Maybury, M., Rist, T., Ruggieri, S., Trahanias, P., and Wilson, M. 1998. A standard reference model for intelligent multimedia presentation systems. Comput. Stand. Interfaces. Special Issue on Intelligent Multimedia Presentation Systems 18, 6-7, 477--496. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Borning, A., Lin, R., and Marriott, K. 2000. Constraint-based document layout for the Web. Multimed. Syst. J. 8, 3, 177--189. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Boutilier, C., Brafman, R., Domshlak, C., Hoos, H., and Poole, D. 2004a. CP-nets: A tool for representing and reasoning about conditional ceteris paribus preference statements. J. Art. Intell. Res. 21, 135--191. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Boutilier, C., Brafman, R., Domshlak, C., Hoos, H., and Poole, D. 2004b. Preference-based constrained optimization with CP-nets. Comput. Intell. (Special Issue on Preferences in AI and CP) 20, 2, 137--157.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Boutilier, C., Brafman, R., Hoos, H., and Poole, D. 1999. Reasoning with conditional ceteris paribus preference statements. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (Stockholm, Sweden). 71--80. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Boyle, C. and Encarnacion, A. 1994. Metadoc: An adaptive hypertext reading system. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 4, 1--19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Brafman, R. I. and Dimopoulos, Y. 2003. A new look at the semantics and optimization methods of CP-networks. In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Acapulco, Maxico). 1033--1038. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Brafman, R. I., Domshlak, C., and Shimony, S. E. 2003. Qualitative decision making in adaptive presentation of structured information. Tech. rep. CS-03-17. Department of Computer Science, Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Brusilovsky, P. 1996. Methods and techniques of adaptive hypermedia. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 6, 2-3, 87--129. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Brusilovsky, P. 2001. Adaptive hypermedia. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 11, 1-2, 87--110. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. de Bra, P., Brusilovsky, P., and Houben, G.-J. 1999. Adaptive hypermedia: From systems to framework. ACM Comput. Surv. 31, 4es, 12. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. de Bra, P. and Calvi, L. 1998. AHA!---An open adaptive hypermedia architecture. New Rev. Hypermed. Multimed. 4, 115--139.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Domshlak, C. and Brafman, R. 2002. CP-nets---reasoning and consistency testing. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (Toulouse, France). 121--132.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Domshlak, C., Rossi, F., Venable, C., and Walsh, T. 2003. Reasoning about soft constraints and conditional preferences: Complexity results and approximation techniques. In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Acapulco, Maxico). 215--220. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Domshlak, C. and Shimony, S. E. 2002. Improving the dynamic behavior of CP-net based multimedia systems by predicting likely components. In AAAI/KDD/UAI Joint Workshop on Real-Time Decision Support and Diagnosis Systems (Edmonton, Alta., Canada).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Domshlak, C. and Shimony, S. E. 2003. Efficient probabilistic reasoning in Bayes nets with mutual exclusion and context specific independence. In Proceedings of the 16th International FLAIRS Conference, Special Track on Uncertain Reasoning (St. Augustine, FL). 496--500.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Doyle, J., Shoham, Y., and Wellman, M. 1991. A logic of relative desire (preliminary report). In Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems LNCS vol. 542. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 16--31. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Doyle, J. and Thomason, R. H. 1999. Background to qualitative decision theory. AI Mag. 20, 2, 55--68.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Doyle, J. and Wellman, M. 1994. Representing preferences as ceteris paribus comparatives. In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Decision-Theoretic Planning (Stanford, CA). 69--75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Dwork, C., Kumar, R., Naor, M., and Sivakumar, D. 2001. Rank aggregation methods for the Web. In Proceedings of the 10th International World Wide Web Conference (Hong Kong). 613--622. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Fox, A. and Brewer, E. A. 1996. Reducing WWW latency and bandwidth requirements by real-time distillation. In Proceedings of the 5th International World Wide Web Conference (Paris). 1445--1456. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Friedman, N. and Goldszmidt, M. 1996. Learning Bayesian networks with local structure. In Proceedings of 12th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. 252--262. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Glass, J. 1999. Challenges for spoken dialogue systems. In IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding (Keystone, CO). Available online at http://www.sls.lcs.mit.edu/sls/publications/1999/asru99-jrg.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Gudes, E., Domshlak, C., and Orlov, N. 2002. Remote conferencing with multimedia objects. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Multimedia Data Document Engineering. Lecture Notes on Computer Science, vol. 2490. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 526--536. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Hansson, S. O. 1996. What is ceteris paribus preference. J. Philosoph. Logic 25, 3, 307--332.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Hohl, H., Böcker, H.-D., and Gunzenhäuser, R. 1996. HYPADAPTER: An adaptive hypertext system for exploratory learning and programming. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 6, 2-3, 131--155.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Hurst, N., Marriott, K., and Moulder, P. 2002. Dynamic approximation of complex graphical constraints by linear constraints. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Paris, France). 191--200. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Karagiannidis, C., Koumpis, A., and Stephanidis, C. 1998. Adaption in IMMPS as a decision making process. Comput. Stand. Interfaces (Special Issue on Intelligent Multimedia Presentation Systems) 18, 6-7. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, H. 1976. Decision with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. Wiley, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Li, W., Vu, Q., Agrawal, D., Hara, Y., and Takano, H. 1999. PowerBookmarks: A system for personalizable web information organization. In Proceedings of the 8th International World Wide Web Conference (Toronto, Ont., Canada). 565--567. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Lie, H. W. and Bos, B. 1997. Cascading Style Sheets. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Marriott, K., Moulder, P., Stuckey, P. J., and Borning, A. 2001. Solving disjunctive constraints for interactive graphical applications. In Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (Paphos, Greece). 361--376. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Mohan, R., Smith, J. R., and Li, C.-S. 1999. Adapting multimedia Internet content for universal access. IEEE Trans. Multimed. 1, 1, 104--114. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Pearl, J. 1988. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Roth, S. and Hefley, W. 1993. Intelligent multimedia presentation systems: Research and principles. In Intelligent Multimedia Interfaces, M. Maybury, Ed. AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, 13--58. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Rule, J. and Rule, J. S. 1998. Dynamic HTML: The HTML Developer's Guide. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Santos, Jr., E. 1993. Modelling cyclicity and generalized cost-based abduction using linear constraint satisfaction. J. Exp. Theoret. Art. Intell. 5, 359--390.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Schrijver, A. 1986. Theory of Linear and Integer Programming. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, London, U.K. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Shimony, S. E. and Santos, Jr., E. 1996. Exploiting case-based independence for approximating marginal probabilities. International J. Approx. Reason. 14, 1, 25--54.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Shoham, Y. 1997. Conditional utility, utility independence, and utility networks. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (San Francisco, CA). 429--436. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Tan, S. W. and Pearl, J. 1994. Qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the 12th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Seattle, WA). 928--933. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. von Wright, G. H. 1963. The Logic of Preference: An Essay. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, Scotland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Qualitative decision making in adaptive presentation of structured information

                    Recommendations

                    Comments

                    Login options

                    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

                    Sign in

                    Full Access

                    PDF Format

                    View or Download as a PDF file.

                    PDF

                    eReader

                    View online with eReader.

                    eReader