online dating recommender systems: the split-complex number approach

Post on 10-May-2015

1.080 Views

Category:

Education

3 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

A typical recommender setting is based on two kinds of relations: similarity between users (or between objects) and the taste of users towards certain objects. In environments such as online dating websites, these two relations are difficult to separate, as the users can be similar to each other, but also have preferences towards other users, i.e., rate other users. In this paper, we present a novel and unified way to model this duality of the relations by using split-complex numbers, a number system related to the complex numbers that is used in mathematics, physics and other fields. We show that this unified representation is capable of modeling both notions of relations between users in a joint expression and apply it for recommending potential partners. In experiments with the Czech dating website Libimseti.cz we show that our modeling approach leads to an improvement over baseline recommendation methods in this scenario.

TRANSCRIPT

Web Science and Technologies

University of Koblenz–Landau, Germany

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach

Jérôme Kunegis, Gerd Gröner, Thomas GottronUniversity of Koblenz–Landau

RSWeb'12

September 9, 2012

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 2

Friend Recommendation

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 3

Friend/Foe Recommendation

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 4

DISSIMILAR

LIKE

DISLIKE

SIMILAR

Dating Recommendation

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 5

Triangle Closing

Friend Friend

Friend ‌× Friend = Friend

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 6

+1 × +1 = +1−1 × +1 = −1−1 × −1 = +1

“The Enemy of My Enemy”

Foe Foe

Foe ‌× Foe = Friend

Friend = +1Foe = −1

(Kunegis et al. 1999)

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 7

Dating RecommendationLike Like

Like ‌× Like = Similar

Similar Similar

Similar ‌× Similar = Similar

Similar Like

Similar ‌× Like = Like

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 8

z = a + bj

j × j = +1

(a + bj) + (c + dj) = (a + c) + (b + d)j(a + bj) × (c + dj) = (ac + bd) + (ad + bc)j

Not a field: (1 + j)(1 − j) = 0

Introduced as real tessarines (Cockle 1848)

Split-complex Numbers

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 9

+j

+1

−1

−j

0Re

Im

LIKE

DISLIKE

SIMILAR

DISSIMILAR

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 10

Adjacency Matrix

0 1 0 0 0 01 0 1 1 0 00 1 0 1 0 00 1 1 0 1 00 0 0 1 0 10 0 0 0 1 0

Auv

= 1 when u and v are connected

Auv

= 0 when u and v are not connected

1 2 4 5 6

3

A =

1

2

3

4

5

6

1 2 3 4 5 6

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 11

Recommender Functions

exp(A) = I + A + 1/2 A2 + 1/6 A3 + . . .

1 2 4 5

3

1 2 3 4 5 61234566

0 1 0 0 0 0 01 0 1 1 0 0 00 1 0 1 0 0 00 1 1 0 1 0 00 0 0 1 0 1 00 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 1 0

exp =

1 .66 1 .72 0 .93 0 .98 0 .28 0 . 06 0 .011.72 3 .57 2.70 2 .93 1. 04 0. 29 0 .060 .93 2 .70 2.86 2.71 0 .99 0 . 28 0 .060 .98 2 .93 2 .71 3 .63 1. 95 0 . 76 0 .220 .28 1.04 0 .99 1 .95 2 .35 1. 59 0 .640 .06 0 .29 0 .28 0 .76 1 .59 2. 23 1 .380.01 0 .06 0.06 0 .22 0 .64 1 . 38 1 .59

76

7

7

0.98 0.76 0.22

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 12

Split-complex Adjacency Matrix

Buv

= +j when u likes v

Buv

= −j when u dislikes v

Buv

= 0 when u and v are not connected

B = jA

1 2 4 5 6

3

B =

1

2

3

4

5

6

1 2 3 4 5 6

+j

+j +j

+j

+j−j

−j

−j

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 13

Split-complex Numbers as 2×2 Matrices

a + bj ≡ a

b a

b

a

b a

b c

d c

d a+c

b+d a+c

b+d+ =

a

b a

b c

d c

d ac+bd

ad+bc ac+bd

ad+bc× =

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 14

Computation

B ≡ A

AT

exp(B) ≡ cosh(A)

sinh(A)

sinh(A)

cosh(A)

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 15

(“Do you like me”) – Czech dating site

Evaluation

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 16

Evaluation

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 17

Thank YouJérôme Kunegis @kunegis

Thanks go to Václav Petříček for providing the Libimseti.cz dataset. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement n° 257859, ROBUST.

konect.uni-koblenz.de/networks/libimseti

Jérôme Kunegis et al.RSWeb'12

Online Dating Recommender Systems: The Split-complex Number Approach 18

J. Kunegis, G. Gröner, T. Gottron. Online dating recommender systems: the split-complex number approach. Proc. Workshop on Recommender Systems and the Social Web, 2012.

J. Cockle. On certain functions resembling quaternions, and on a new imaginary in algebra. Philos. Mag., 33(3):435–439, 1848.

J. Kunegis, A. Lommatzsch, C. Bauckhage. The Slashdot Zoo: mining a social network with negative edges. Proc. Int. World Wide Web Conf., 741–750, 2009.

J. Kunegis, D. Fay, C. Bauckhage. Network growth and the spectral evolution model. Proc. Int. Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management, 739–748, 2010.

References

top related