DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Social Network Analysis for the Effective Adoption of Recommender Systems

추천시스템의 효과적 도입을 위한 소셜네트워크 분석

  • Park, Jong-Hak (Department of e-Business, Dongyang Mirae University) ;
  • Cho, Yoon-Ho (School of Management Information Systems, Kookmin University)
  • 박종학 (동양미래대학 e-비즈니스과) ;
  • 조윤호 (국민대학교 경영대학 경영정보학부)
  • Received : 2011.11.18
  • Accepted : 2011.12.20
  • Published : 2011.12.31

Abstract

Recommender system is the system which, by using automated information filtering technology, recommends products or services to the customers who are likely to be interested in. Those systems are widely used in many different Web retailers such as Amazon.com, Netfix.com, and CDNow.com. Various recommender systems have been developed. Among them, Collaborative Filtering (CF) has been known as the most successful and commonly used approach. CF identifies customers whose tastes are similar to those of a given customer, and recommends items those customers have liked in the past. Numerous CF algorithms have been developed to increase the performance of recommender systems. However, the relative performances of CF algorithms are known to be domain and data dependent. It is very time-consuming and expensive to implement and launce a CF recommender system, and also the system unsuited for the given domain provides customers with poor quality recommendations that make them easily annoyed. Therefore, predicting in advance whether the performance of CF recommender system is acceptable or not is practically important and needed. In this study, we propose a decision making guideline which helps decide whether CF is adoptable for a given application with certain transaction data characteristics. Several previous studies reported that sparsity, gray sheep, cold-start, coverage, and serendipity could affect the performance of CF, but the theoretical and empirical justification of such factors is lacking. Recently there are many studies paying attention to Social Network Analysis (SNA) as a method to analyze social relationships among people. SNA is a method to measure and visualize the linkage structure and status focusing on interaction among objects within communication group. CF analyzes the similarity among previous ratings or purchases of each customer, finds the relationships among the customers who have similarities, and then uses the relationships for recommendations. Thus CF can be modeled as a social network in which customers are nodes and purchase relationships between customers are links. Under the assumption that SNA could facilitate an exploration of the topological properties of the network structure that are implicit in transaction data for CF recommendations, we focus on density, clustering coefficient, and centralization which are ones of the most commonly used measures to capture topological properties of the social network structure. While network density, expressed as a proportion of the maximum possible number of links, captures the density of the whole network, the clustering coefficient captures the degree to which the overall network contains localized pockets of dense connectivity. Centralization reflects the extent to which connections are concentrated in a small number of nodes rather than distributed equally among all nodes. We explore how these SNA measures affect the performance of CF performance and how they interact to each other. Our experiments used sales transaction data from H department store, one of the well?known department stores in Korea. Total 396 data set were sampled to construct various types of social networks. The dependant variable measuring process consists of three steps; analysis of customer similarities, construction of a social network, and analysis of social network patterns. We used UCINET 6.0 for SNA. The experiments conducted the 3-way ANOVA which employs three SNA measures as dependant variables, and the recommendation accuracy measured by F1-measure as an independent variable. The experiments report that 1) each of three SNA measures affects the recommendation accuracy, 2) the density's effect to the performance overrides those of clustering coefficient and centralization (i.e., CF adoption is not a good decision if the density is low), and 3) however though the density is low, the performance of CF is comparatively good when the clustering coefficient is low. We expect that these experiment results help firms decide whether CF recommender system is adoptable for their business domain with certain transaction data characteristics.

협업필터링은 다양한 분야에서 널리 활용되고 있지만 협업필터링의 추천 성능은 적용하는 기업의 비즈니스 형태나 발생하는 거래 데이터의 특성에 따라 다르게 나타나고 있다. 기업에서 협업필터링 추천시스템을 구축하려면 상당한 시간과 비용이 소요되기 때문에 구축된 추천시스템의 성과가 높지 않다면 기업 자원의 낭비를 초래할 뿐만 아니라 부정확한 추천서비스를 받는 고객들의 불만을 살 수 있다. 따라서 추천시스템 도입을 검토할 때 기업이 갖고 있는 데이터의 특성을 파악하고 이를 통해 추천시스템을 도입하는 것이 타당한지 사전에 예측할 수 있다면 불필요한 도입으로 인한 경제적 손실과 고객 만족도 저하를 막을 수 있을 것이다. 기존 연구에서는 협업필터링 추천 성과에 희박성, 우연성, 커버리지 등이 영향을 미칠 수 있다고 설명하고 있지만 이러한 요인들이 어떻게 얼마나 추천 성과에 영향을 미치는지, 요인들 간에 어떠한 상관관계가 있는지는 현재까지 구체적으로 밝혀진 바가 없다. 본 연구에서는 구매 트랜잭션으로부터 생성된 소셜네트워크로부터 밀도, 군집화계수, 집중도 등의 구조적 지표를 측정한 후 이들이 추천성과에 어떻게 영향을 미치는지 통계적 분석을 통해 실증적으로 규명한다. 이를 통해 협업필터링 추천시스템에 대한 도입 여부를 결정하고자 할 때 유용하게 사용될 수 있는 지침을 제공하고자 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김용학, 사회연결망 분석, 박영사, 2003
  2. 손동원, 사회 네트워크 분석, 경문사, 2002.
  3. 박종학, 조윤호, 김재경, "사회연결망:신규고객 추천문제의 새로운 접근법", 지능정보연구, 15권 1호(2009), 123-139.
  4. 조윤호, 김인환, "사회연결망분석과 인공신경망을 이용한 추천시스템 성능 예측", 지능정보연구, 16권 4호(2010), 1591-172.
  5. Adomavicious, G. and A. Tuzhilin, "Toward the next generation of recommender systems: A survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions", IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol.17, No.6 (2005), 734-749. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2005.99
  6. Amorim, S., J. P. Barthelemy, and C. Ribeiro, "Clustering and clique partitioning:simulated annealing and tabu search approaches", Journal of Classification, Vol.9(1992), 17-41.
  7. Bonacich, P., "Power and centrality:A family of measures", American Journal of Sociology, Vol.92(1987), 1170-1182. https://doi.org/10.1086/228631
  8. Breiger, R., S. Boorman, and P. Arabie, "An algorithm for clustering relational data, with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multi-dimensional scaling", Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol.12(1975), 328-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(75)90028-0
  9. Burt, R. S., Structure 4.1 Reference Manual. NY, Comlumbia University, 1991
  10. Frank, O. and F. Harary, "Cluster Inference by Using Transitivity Indices in Empirical Graphs", Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol.77, No.380(1982), 835-840. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1982.10477895
  11. Freeman, L., "Centrality in social networks:Conceptual clarification", Social Networks, Vol.1 (1979), 215-239.
  12. Herlocker, J. L., J. A. Konstan, L. G. Terveen, and J. T. Riedl, "Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems", ACM Transactions on Information Systems, Vol.22, No.1(2004), 5-53. https://doi.org/10.1145/963770.963772
  13. Huang, Z. and D. Zeng, "Why Does Collaborative Filtering Work? Recommendation Model Validation and Selection by Analyzing Random Bipartite Graphs", Proceedings of 15th Annual Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems, 2005.
  14. Huang, Z., D. Zeng, and H. Chen, "A Comparative Study of Recommendation Algorithms in E-commerce Applications", IEEE Intelligent Systems, Vol.22, No.5(2007), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2007.4338497
  15. Murakami, T., K. Mori, and R. Orihara, "Metrics for evaluating the serendipity of recommendation lists", Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol.4914(2008), 40-46.
  16. Ryu, Y. U., H. K. Kim, Y. H. Cho, and J. K. Kim, "Peer-oriented content recommendation in a social network", Proceedings of the Sixteenth Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems, (2006), 115-120.
  17. Sarwar, B., G. Karypis, J. A. Konstan, and J. Riedl, "Analysis of recommendation algorithms for e-commerce", Proceedings of ACM E-commerce conference, (2000), 158-167.
  18. Schank, T. and D. Wagner, "Approximating clustering coefficient and transitivity", JGAA, Vol.9, No.2(2005), 265-275. https://doi.org/10.7155/jgaa.00108
  19. Scott, J., Social Network Analysis:A Handbook, Thousand Oaks, 2000.
  20. Seidman, S. B. and B. L. Foster, "A note on the potential for genuine cross-fertilization between anthropology and mathematics", Social Networks, Vol.1(1978), 65-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90013-8
  21. Su, X. and T. M. Khoshgoftaar, "A survey of collaborative filtering techniques", Advances in Artificial Intelligence, Vol.2009, No.4(2009).
  22. Wasserman, S. and K. Faust, "Social network analysis:Methods and application", New York:Cambridge University Press, 1994.
  23. Watts, D. J., "Small worlds, Princeton", NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.

Cited by

  1. Recommending Talks at International Research Conferences vol.18, pp.3, 2011, https://doi.org/10.13088/jiis.2012.18.3.013