skip to main content
10.1145/3077136.3080754acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Venue Appropriateness Prediction for Personalized Context-Aware Venue Suggestion

Published:07 August 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Personalized context-aware venue suggestion plays a critical role in satisfying the users' needs on location-based social networks (LBSNs). In this paper, we present a set of novel scores to measure the similarity between a user and a candidate venue in a new city. The scores are based on user's history of preferences in other cities as well as user's context. We address the data sparsity problem in venue recommendation with the aid of a proposed approach to predict contextually appropriate places. Furthermore, we show how to incorporate different scores to improve the performance of recommendation. The experimental results of our participation in the TREC 2016 Contextual Suggestion track show that our approach beats state-of-the-art strategies.

References

  1. Mohammad Aliannejadi, Ida Mele, and Fabio Crestani. 2016natexlaba. User Model Enrichment for Venue Recommendation. In AIRS. Springer, 212--223.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Mohammad Aliannejadi, Ida Mele, and Fabio Crestani. 2016natexlabb. Venue Appropriateness Prediction for Contextual Suggestion TREC. NIST.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Mohammad Aliannejadi, Ida Mele, and Fabio Crestani. 2017natexlaba. A Cross-Platform Collection for Contextual Suggestion SIGIR 2017. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Mohammad Aliannejadi, Dimitrios Rafailidis, and Fabio Crestani 2017natexlabb. Personalized Keyword Boosting for Venue Suggestion Based on Multiple LBSNs ECIR. Springer, 291--303.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Zhe Cao, Tao Qin, Tie-Yan Liu, Ming-Feng Tsai, and Hang Li 2007. Learning to Rank: From Pairwise Approach to Listwise Approach ICML. ACM, 129--136.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Li Chen, Guanliang Chen, and Feng Wang 2015. Recommender systems based on user reviews: the state of the art. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction Vol. 25, 2 (2015), 99--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Chen Cheng, Haiqin Yang, Irwin King, and Michael R. Lyu. 2012. Fused Matrix Factorization with Geographical and Social Influence in Location-Based Social Networks. In AAAI. AAAI Press, 17--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Corinna Cortes and Vladimir Vapnik 1995. Support-Vector Networks. Machine Learning, Vol. 20, 3 (1995), 273--297. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Romain Deveaud, M-Dyaa Albakour, Craig Macdonald, and Iadh Ounis 2015. Experiments with a Venue-Centric Model for Personalised and Time-Aware Venue Suggestion CIKM. ACM, 53--62.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Jean-Beno^ıt Griesner, Talel Abdessalem, and Hubert Naacke. 2015. POI Recommendation: Towards Fused Matrix Factorization with Geographical and Temporal Influences. In RecSys. ACM, 301--304.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Seyyed Hadi Hashemi, Charles L. A. Clarke, Jaap Kamps, Julia Kiseleva, and Ellen M. Voorhees. 2016. Overview of the TREC 2016 Contextual Suggestion Track TREC. NIST.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Georgios Kalamatianos and Avi Arampatzis 2016. Recommending Points-of-Interest via Weighted kNN, Rated Rocchio, and Borda Count Fusion TREC. NIST.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Yehuda Koren, Robert M. Bell, and Chris Volinsky. 2009. Matrix Factorization Techniques for Recommender Systems. IEEE Computer, Vol. 42, 8 (2009), 30--37. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Asher Levi, Osnat Mokryn, Christophe Diot, and Nina Taft. 2012. Finding a needle in a haystack of reviews: cold start context-based hotel recommender system RecSys. ACM, 115--122.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Jarana Manotumruksa, Craig MacDonald, and Iadh Ounis. 2016. Predicting Contextually Appropriate Venues in Location-Based Social Networks CLEF. Springer, 96--109.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Jian Mo, Luc Lamontagne, and Richard Khoury 2016. Word embeddings and Global Preference for Contextual Suggestion TREC. NIST.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Peilin Yang and Hui Fang 2015. University of Delaware at TREC 2015: Combining Opinion Profile Modeling with Complex Context Filtering for Contextual Suggestion TREC. NIST.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Quan Yuan, Gao Cong, Zongyang Ma, Aixin Sun, and Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann. 2013. Time-aware point-of-interest recommendation. In SIGIR. ACM, 363--372.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Venue Appropriateness Prediction for Personalized Context-Aware Venue Suggestion

      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
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SIGIR '17: Proceedings of the 40th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval
        August 2017
        1476 pages
        ISBN:9781450350228
        DOI:10.1145/3077136

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 7 August 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • short-paper

        Acceptance Rates

        SIGIR '17 Paper Acceptance Rate78of362submissions,22%Overall Acceptance Rate792of3,983submissions,20%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader