Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing 2016
DOI: 10.1145/2851613.2851811
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SimRank and its variants in academic literature data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One of the most popular metrics is SimRank [25], which iteratively computes similarity scores based on the hypothesis that two nodes are similar if they link to similar nodes. Different extensions of SimRank have been proposed [26]. SimRank recursively computes the similarity of two nodes according to the average similarity of all their neighbor pairs, which can also be interpreted, as suggested by its original authors, as how soon two random walkers will meet if they start from these nodes.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the most popular metrics is SimRank [25], which iteratively computes similarity scores based on the hypothesis that two nodes are similar if they link to similar nodes. Different extensions of SimRank have been proposed [26]. SimRank recursively computes the similarity of two nodes according to the average similarity of all their neighbor pairs, which can also be interpreted, as suggested by its original authors, as how soon two random walkers will meet if they start from these nodes.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the current success of SimRank, authors claim that it has some problems that negatively affect its effectiveness in similarity computation. Hamedani and Kim [2016] discuss existing problems of SimRank, present SimRank variants that have been proposed to solve those problems, and evaluate the effectiveness of SimRank and its variants in similarity computation for academic literature.…”
Section: Other Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%