Argument-based generation and explanation of recommendations

Abstract

In the recommender systems literature, it has been shown that, in addition to improving system effectiveness, explaining recommendations may increase user satisfaction, trust, persuasion and loyalty. In general, explanations focus on the filtering algorithms or the users and items involved in the generation of recommendations. However, on certain domains that are rich on user-generated textual content, it would be valuable to provide justifications of recommendations according to arguments that are explicit, underlying or related with the data used by the systems, e.g., the reasons for customers' opinions in reviews of e-commerce sites, and the requests and claims in citizens' proposals and debates of e-participation platforms. In this context, there is a need and challenging task to automatically extract and exploit the arguments given for and against evaluated items. We thus advocate to focus not only on user preferences and item features, but also on associated arguments. In other words, we propose to not only consider what is said about items, but also why it is said. Hence, arguments would not only be part of the recommendation explanations, but could also be used by the recommendation algorithms themselves. To this end, in this thesis, we propose to use argument mining techniques and tools that allow retrieving and relating argumentative information from textual content, and investigate recommendation methods that exploit that information before, during and after their filtering processes. CCS CONCEPTS• Information systems → Recommender systems; • Computing methodologies → Discourse, dialogue and pragmatics.

The Use of Artificial Intelligence in eParticipation: Mapping Current Research

“…Paper ID F-measure [44,45,47,48,57,58,60,64,66,73,77,80,82,86] Precision [43,45,57,60,62,66,67,73,[76][77][78]80,82,86] Accuracy [43,44,46,62,63,69,70,73,[76][77][78]80,82] Recall [45,52,57,60,62,66,73,77,78,80,82,…”

“…Paper ID Deliberative [42,48,55,61,64,65,69,71,79,81,86] Democratic [41,44,50,54,65,81,85] Civic Engagement [41,44,47,[49][50][51][53][54][55]58,60,63,65,66,[68][69][70]74,76,[78][79][80][81][82][83]85,86]…”

“…In some studies, these evaluations are about "Openness and Transparency" that the implementation of a new technology [77] or a new platform [60] offers while others document problems that are caused by the lack of Openness and Transparency in existing platforms [79]. [41,60,65,76] As for "quantity", the literature almost never mentions a particularly high increase in participation. Divergent outcomes follow the implementation of digital platforms for policymaking.…”