ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Don't look stupid: avoiding pitfalls when recommending research papers
Full text PdfPdf (1.38 MB)
Source Computer Supported Cooperative Work archive
Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work table of contents
Banff, Alberta, Canada
SESSION: Social tagging and recommending table of contents
Pages: 171 - 180  
Year of Publication: 2006
ISBN:1-59593-249-6
Authors
Sean M. McNee  University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Nishikant Kapoor  University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Joseph A. Konstan  University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Sponsors
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 21,   Downloads (12 Months): 108,   Citation Count: 1
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1180875.1180903
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

If recommenders are to help people be more productive, they need to support a wide variety of real-world information seeking tasks, such as those found when seeking research papers in a digital library. There are many potential pitfalls, including not knowing what tasks to support, generating recommendations for the wrong task, or even failing to generate any meaningful recommendations whatsoever. We posit that different recommender algorithms are better suited to certain information seeking tasks. In this work, we perform a detailed user study with over 130 users to understand these differences between recommender algorithms through an online survey of paper recommendations from the ACM Digital Library. We found that pitfalls are hard to avoid. Two of our algorithms generated 'atypical' recommendations recommendations that were unrelated to their input baskets. Users reacted accordingly, providing strong negative results for these algorithms. Results from our 'typical' algorithms show some qualitative differences, but since users were exposed to two algorithms, the results may be biased. We present a wide variety of results, teasing out differences between algorithms. Finally, we succinctly summarize our most striking results as "Don't Look Stupid" in front of users.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
J.S. Breese, D. Heckerman and C. Kadie, "Empirical Analysis of Predictive Algorithms for Collaborative Filtering", in Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 43--52, 1998.
 
2
 
3
4
 
5
D.O. Case, Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior, San Diego: Academic Press, 2002, pp. 350.
 
6
P. Domingos and M. Pazzani, "Beyond Independence: Conditions for the Optimality of the Simple Bayesian Classifier", in Proc. of the 13th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 96), pp. 105--112, 1996.
 
7
 
8
9
10
11
12
 
13
I. Im and A. Hars, "Finding Information just for You: Knowledge Reuse using Collaborative Filtering Systems", in Proc. of the Twenty-Second International Conference on Information Systems, pp. 349--360, 2001.
 
14
G. Karypis, "SUGGEST Top-N Recommendation Engine", http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~karypis/suggest/, 2000.
15
 
16
C.C. Kuhlthau, Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services, Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2004, pp. 247.
 
17
A. K. McCallum, "Bow: A Toolkit for Statistical Language Modeling, Text Retrieval, Classification and Clustering", http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/mccallum/bow/, 1996.
 
18
S.M. McNee. Meeting User Information Needs in Recommender Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota. 2006.
 
19
S.M. McNee, J. Riedl and J.A. Konstan, "Being Accurate is Not enough: How Accuracy Metrics have Hurt
20
21
 
22
 
23
National Institutes of Health (NIH), "Entrez PubMed", http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/, 2006.
24
 
25
26
27
 
28
29
 
30
R.S. Taylor, "Question-Negotiation and Information Seeking in Libraries", College and Research Libraries, vol. 29pp. 178--194, May, 1968.
31


Collaborative Colleagues:
Sean M. McNee: colleagues
Nishikant Kapoor: colleagues
Joseph A. Konstan: colleagues