Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
Proceedings of the Second ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining 2009
DOI: 10.1145/1498759.1498809
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clustering the tagged web

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

6
100
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 182 publications
(108 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
6
100
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar results can be found elsewhere, including [9], [7], and [37]. Along this line, there have been some recent efforts to identify clusters (topics) of tags and resources, including: [26], which mined tag-based topics via association rules; [42], which iteratively determines user interests and resource topics over a bipartite graph where users and resource are nodes and tagging counts are edges; and [35], which identifies groups of web resources by clustering them via their tags using both K-means and probabilistic clustering. These results motivate our interest in uncovering hidden communities that could help explain these phenomena.…”
Section: Overviewsupporting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similar results can be found elsewhere, including [9], [7], and [37]. Along this line, there have been some recent efforts to identify clusters (topics) of tags and resources, including: [26], which mined tag-based topics via association rules; [42], which iteratively determines user interests and resource topics over a bipartite graph where users and resource are nodes and tagging counts are edges; and [35], which identifies groups of web resources by clustering them via their tags using both K-means and probabilistic clustering. These results motivate our interest in uncovering hidden communities that could help explain these phenomena.…”
Section: Overviewsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Social bookmarking systems, however, aggregate what would appear to be the independent and uncoordinated tagging actions of a large and heterogeneous tagger population, meaning that it is not obvious that communities of users exist or are detectable. Given the strong evidence of community in the other areas of the Social Web and recent research that has indicated the evidence of coherent tag-based and resourcebased clusters in social bookmarking systems [35,8,41,44,34], we are interested to explore: (i) if user-based communities manifest themselves in social bookmarking systems and how to model them; and (ii) whether this community-based perspective can enhance how users explore the web of socially tagged resources.…”
Section: Figure 1: Two Users Linking To Web Resourcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Greco et al [15] propose a similar approach based on the linear combination of mutual information evaluated on each feature space, where the parameter of the linear combination is automatically determined. Ramage et al [28], propose a generative clustering algorithm based on latent Dirichlet allocation to cluster documents using two different sources of information: document text and tags. Each source is modeled by a probability distribution and a weight value is used to weigh one vector space with respect to the other.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Along this line, [14] incorporates user contributed comments in the data cloud generation process. Some other researchers have explored using user-generated tags and comments for flat clustering, e.g., [18] and [16].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%