机器学习推荐系统可为馆藏开发决策提供信息

IF 0.4 Q4 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Evidence Based Library and Information Practice Pub Date : 2024-06-14 DOI:10.18438/eblip30521
Kristy Hancock
{"title":"机器学习推荐系统可为馆藏开发决策提供信息","authors":"Kristy Hancock","doi":"10.18438/eblip30521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A Review of:\nXiao, J., & Gao, W. (2020). Connecting the dots: reader ratings, bibliographic data, and machine-learning algorithms for monograph selection. The Serials Librarian, 78(1-4), 117-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2020.1707599\nObjective – To illustrate how machine-learning book recommender systems can help librarians make collection development decisions.\nDesign – Data analysis of publicly available book sales rankings and reader ratings.\nSetting – The internet.\nSubjects – 192 New York Times hardcover fiction best seller titles from 2018, and 1,367 Goodreads ratings posted in 2018.\nMethods – Data were collected using Application Programming Interfaces. The researchers retrieved weekly hardcover fiction best seller rankings published by the New York Times in 2018 in CSV file format. All 52 files, each containing bibliographic data for 15 hardcover fiction titles, were combined and duplicate titles removed, resulting in 192 unique best seller titles. The researchers retrieved reader ratings of the 192 best seller titles from Goodreads. The ratings were limited to those posted in 2018 by the top Goodreads reviewers.\nA Bayes estimator produced a list of the top ten highest rated New York Times best sellers. The researchers built the recommender system using Python and employed several content-based and collaborative filtering recommender techniques (e.g., cosine similarity, term frequency-inverse document frequency, and matrix factorization algorithms) to identify novels similar to the highest rated best sellers.\nMain Results – Each recommender technique generated a different list of novels.\nConclusion – The main finding from this study is that recommender systems can simplify collection development for librarians and facilitate greater access to relevant library materials for users. Academic libraries can use the same recommender techniques employed in the study to identify titles similar to highly circulated monographs or frequently requested interlibrary loans. There are several limitations to using recommender systems in libraries, including privacy concerns when analyzing user behaviour data and potential biases in machine-learning algorithms.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Machine-learning Recommender Systems Can Inform Collection Development Decisions\",\"authors\":\"Kristy Hancock\",\"doi\":\"10.18438/eblip30521\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A Review of:\\nXiao, J., & Gao, W. (2020). Connecting the dots: reader ratings, bibliographic data, and machine-learning algorithms for monograph selection. The Serials Librarian, 78(1-4), 117-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2020.1707599\\nObjective – To illustrate how machine-learning book recommender systems can help librarians make collection development decisions.\\nDesign – Data analysis of publicly available book sales rankings and reader ratings.\\nSetting – The internet.\\nSubjects – 192 New York Times hardcover fiction best seller titles from 2018, and 1,367 Goodreads ratings posted in 2018.\\nMethods – Data were collected using Application Programming Interfaces. The researchers retrieved weekly hardcover fiction best seller rankings published by the New York Times in 2018 in CSV file format. All 52 files, each containing bibliographic data for 15 hardcover fiction titles, were combined and duplicate titles removed, resulting in 192 unique best seller titles. The researchers retrieved reader ratings of the 192 best seller titles from Goodreads. The ratings were limited to those posted in 2018 by the top Goodreads reviewers.\\nA Bayes estimator produced a list of the top ten highest rated New York Times best sellers. The researchers built the recommender system using Python and employed several content-based and collaborative filtering recommender techniques (e.g., cosine similarity, term frequency-inverse document frequency, and matrix factorization algorithms) to identify novels similar to the highest rated best sellers.\\nMain Results – Each recommender technique generated a different list of novels.\\nConclusion – The main finding from this study is that recommender systems can simplify collection development for librarians and facilitate greater access to relevant library materials for users. Academic libraries can use the same recommender techniques employed in the study to identify titles similar to highly circulated monographs or frequently requested interlibrary loans. There are several limitations to using recommender systems in libraries, including privacy concerns when analyzing user behaviour data and potential biases in machine-learning algorithms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45227,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30521\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

回顾:Xiao, J., & Gao, W. (2020).连接点:读者评价、书目数据和专著选择的机器学习算法。The Serials Librarian, 78(1-4), 117-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2020.1707599Objective - 说明机器学习图书推荐系统如何帮助图书馆员做出馆藏发展决策。设计 - 对公开的图书销售排名和读者评分进行数据分析。设置 - 互联网。对象 - 2018年《纽约时报》精装小说畅销书192种,2018年Goodreads发布的1367个评分。方法 - 使用应用程序编程接口收集数据。研究人员以 CSV 文件格式检索了《纽约时报》2018 年发布的每周精装小说畅销书排行榜。合并了所有 52 个文件,每个文件包含 15 种精装小说的书目数据,并删除了重复的标题,最终得到 192 种独特的畅销书标题。研究人员从 Goodreads 上检索了这 192 种畅销书的读者评分。评价仅限于 Goodreads 顶级评论员在 2018 年发布的评价。贝叶斯估算器得出了《纽约时报》畅销书中评价最高的前十名名单。研究人员使用 Python 构建了推荐系统,并采用了几种基于内容和协同过滤的推荐技术(如余弦相似度、词频-反向文档频率和矩阵因式分解算法)来识别与评分最高的畅销书相似的小说。主要结果--每种推荐技术生成的小说列表都不相同。结论--本研究的主要发现是,推荐系统可以简化图书馆员的馆藏开发工作,并为用户获取更多相关图书馆资料提供便利。学术图书馆可以使用本研究中使用的相同推荐技术来识别与流通量高的专著或经常申请的馆际互借相似的书目。在图书馆使用推荐系统有几个局限性,包括分析用户行为数据时的隐私问题和机器学习算法的潜在偏差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Machine-learning Recommender Systems Can Inform Collection Development Decisions
A Review of: Xiao, J., & Gao, W. (2020). Connecting the dots: reader ratings, bibliographic data, and machine-learning algorithms for monograph selection. The Serials Librarian, 78(1-4), 117-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2020.1707599 Objective – To illustrate how machine-learning book recommender systems can help librarians make collection development decisions. Design – Data analysis of publicly available book sales rankings and reader ratings. Setting – The internet. Subjects – 192 New York Times hardcover fiction best seller titles from 2018, and 1,367 Goodreads ratings posted in 2018. Methods – Data were collected using Application Programming Interfaces. The researchers retrieved weekly hardcover fiction best seller rankings published by the New York Times in 2018 in CSV file format. All 52 files, each containing bibliographic data for 15 hardcover fiction titles, were combined and duplicate titles removed, resulting in 192 unique best seller titles. The researchers retrieved reader ratings of the 192 best seller titles from Goodreads. The ratings were limited to those posted in 2018 by the top Goodreads reviewers. A Bayes estimator produced a list of the top ten highest rated New York Times best sellers. The researchers built the recommender system using Python and employed several content-based and collaborative filtering recommender techniques (e.g., cosine similarity, term frequency-inverse document frequency, and matrix factorization algorithms) to identify novels similar to the highest rated best sellers. Main Results – Each recommender technique generated a different list of novels. Conclusion – The main finding from this study is that recommender systems can simplify collection development for librarians and facilitate greater access to relevant library materials for users. Academic libraries can use the same recommender techniques employed in the study to identify titles similar to highly circulated monographs or frequently requested interlibrary loans. There are several limitations to using recommender systems in libraries, including privacy concerns when analyzing user behaviour data and potential biases in machine-learning algorithms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
44
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Students’ Perspective of the Advantages and Disadvantages of ChatGPT Compared to Reference Librarians Academic Libraries Can Develop AI Chatbots for Virtual Reference Services with Minimal Technical Knowledge and Limited Resources A Study on the Knowledge and Perception of Artificial Intelligence Increasing Student Engagement in a Re-opened Regional Campus Library: Results from a Student Focus Group Gauging Academic Unit Perceptions of Library Services During a Transition in University Budget Models
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1