skip to main content
10.1145/2348283.2348372acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Collaborative personalized tweet recommendation

Authors Info & Claims
Published:12 August 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Twitter has rapidly grown to a popular social network in recent years and provides a large number of real-time messages for users. Tweets are presented in chronological order and users scan the followees' timelines to find what they are interested in. However, an information overload problem has troubled many users, especially those with many followees and thousands of tweets arriving every day. In this paper, we focus on recommending useful tweets that users are really interested in personally to reduce the users' effort to find useful information. Many kinds of information on Twitter are available for helping recommendation, including the user's own tweet history, retweet history and social relations between users. We propose a method of making tweet recommendations based on collaborative ranking to capture personal interests. It can also conveniently integrate the other useful contextual information. Our final method considers three major elements on Twitter: tweet topic level factors, user social relation factors and explicit features such as authority of the publisher and quality of the tweet. The experiments show that all the proposed elements are important and our method greatly outperforms several baseline methods.

References

  1. D. Agarwal and B. Chen. Regression-based latent factor models. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 19--28. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. D. Blei, A. Ng, and M. Jordan. Latent dirichlet allocation. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3:993--1022, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Y. Cao, J. Xu, T. Liu, H. Li, Y. Huang, and H. Hon. Adapting ranking svm to document retrieval. In Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, pages 186--193. ACM, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. Chen, R. Nairn, L. Nelson, M. Bernstein, and E. Chi. Short and tweet: experiments on recommending content from information streams. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 1185--1194. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. P. Cui, F. Wang, S. Liu, M. Ou, S. Yang, and L. Sun. Who should share what? item-level social influence prediction for users and posts ranking. In Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in Information, pages 185--194. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. A. Das, M. Datar, A. Garg, and S. Rajaram. Google news personalization: scalable online collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 271--280. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Y. Duan, L. Jiang, T. Qin, M. Zhou, and H. Shum. An empirical study on learning to rank of tweets. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 295--303. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. J. Hannon, M. Bennett, and B. Smyth. Recommending twitter users to follow using content and collaborative filtering approaches. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Recommender systems, pages 199--206. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Hannon, K. McCarthy, and B. Smyth. Finding useful users on twitter: twittomender the followee recommender. Advances in Information Retrieval, pages 784--787, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. T. Joachims. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 133--142. ACM, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. P. Kapanipathi, F. Orlandi, A. Sheth, and A. Passant. Personalized filtering of the twitter stream.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Y. Koren. Factorization meets the neighborhood: a multifaceted collaborative filtering model. In Proceeding of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 426--434. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. H. Kwak, C. Lee, H. Park, and S. Moon. What is twitter, a social network or a news media? In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web, pages 591--600. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Y. Li, J. Nie, Y. Zhang, B. Wang, B. Yan, and F. Weng. Contextual recommendation based on text mining. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Posters, pages 692--700. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. G. Linden, B. Smith, and J. York. Amazon. com recommendations: Item-to-item collaborative filtering. Internet Computing, IEEE, 7(1):76--80, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. N. N. Liu and Q. Yang. Eigenrank: a ranking-oriented approach to collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, SIGIR '08, pages 83--90, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. X. Liu, S. Zhang, F. Wei, and M. Zhou. Recognizing named entities in tweets. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (ACL-HLT 2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. H. Ma, H. Yang, M. Lyu, and I. King. Sorec: social recommendation using probabilistic matrix factorization. In Proceeding of the 17th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management, pages 931--940. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. M. Michelson and S. Macskassy. Discovering users' topics of interest on twitter: a first look. In Proceedings of the fourth workshop on Analytics for noisy unstructured text data, pages 73--80. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. N. Naveed, T. Gottron, J. Kunegis, and A. Alhadi. Bad news travel fast: A content-based analysis of interestingness on twitter. 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. J. Pessiot, T. Truong, N. Usunier, M. Amini, and P. Gallinari. Learning to rank for collaborative filtering. In 9th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems. Citeseer, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Z. Qu and Y. Liu. Interactive group suggesting for twitter. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies: short papers-Volume 2, pages 519--523. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. D. Ramage, S. Dumais, and D. Liebling. Characterizing microblogs with topic models. In International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. The AAAI Press, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. S. Rendle. Factorization machines. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, ICDM '10, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. S. Rendle, C. Freudenthaler, Z. Gantner, and S.-T. Lars. Bpr: Bayesian personalized ranking from implicit feedback. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI '09, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. S. Rendle, Z. Gantner, C. Freudenthaler, and L. Schmidt-Thieme. Fast context-aware recommendations with factorization machines. In Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in Information, pages 635--644. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. P. Resnick, N. Iacovou, M. Suchak, P. Bergstrom, and J. Riedl. Grouplens: an open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews. In Proceedings of the 1994 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, pages 175--186. ACM, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. B. Sarwar, G. Karypis, J. Konstan, and J. Reidl. Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on World Wide Web, WWW '01, pages 285--295, New York, NY, USA, 2001. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Y. Shi, M. Larson, and A. Hanjalic. Exploiting user similarity based on rated-item pools for improved user-based collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the third ACM conference on Recommender systems, RecSys '09, pages 125--132, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. D. Stern, R. Herbrich, and T. Graepel. Matchbox: large scale online bayesian recommendations. In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web, pages 111--120. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. A. Sun, J. Cheng, and D. Zeng. A novel recommendation framework for micro-blogging based on information diffusion. In Proceedings of the 19th Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. J. Weng, E. Lim, J. Jiang, and Q. He. Twitterrank: finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers. In Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on Web search and data mining, pages 261--270. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. W. Wu, B. Zhang, and M. Ostendorf. Automatic generation of personalized annotation tags for twitter users. In Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 689--692. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. S. Yang, B. Long, A. Smola, N. Sadagopan, Z. Zheng, and H. Zha. Like like alike: joint friendship and interest propagation in social networks. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web, pages 537--546. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. T. Zaman, R. Herbrich, J. Van Gael, and D. Stern. Predicting information spreading in twitter. In NIPS Workshop on Computational Social Science and the Wisdom of Crowds, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Collaborative personalized tweet recommendation

    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 '12: Proceedings of the 35th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval
      August 2012
      1236 pages
      ISBN:9781450314725
      DOI:10.1145/2348283

      Copyright © 2012 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: 12 August 2012

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate792of3,983submissions,20%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader