text
stringlengths 0
89.3k
|
---|
foraging theory has not been addressed in the existing lit |
erature Combining the IFT with an enhanced variant of |
EHO can substantially contribute in addressing the problem |
of large scale information access on social media |
III Analogy between animal food foraging and |
information foraging on social media |
The information foraging process intends to find paths lead |
ing to relevant information on the Web The theory behind |
it is based on the analogy between animal food foraging be |
havior and human information seeking behavior It assumes |
that when searching for information online users follow in |
dications and hints that guide them to relevant information |
similar to how animals follow the scent of their preys to catch |
them Figure 1 and Table 1 present a good illustration of the |
analogy between information foraging and animals food for |
aging |
Figure 1 Analogy between Information Foraging and Food |
Foraging |
Elements Food Foraging Information Foraging |
ActorsPredator User |
Prey Relevant information |
Trigger Hunger Information needs |
Environment Nature wilderness Web structure social graph |
Cues Scent of the prey Hyperlinks icons titles |
Table 1 Food Foraging analogy with Information Foraging |
The following subsections describe our proposed model for |
adapting information foraging theory to social media plat |
forms as well as the basic notions on which the analogy with |
animal food foraging is groundedA Territory social graph |
In the OFT it is assumed that each animal operates in a de |
limited geographical territory within which it searches for |
food In information foraging the territory corresponds to |
the search space composed of information sources such as |
documents images and Web pages When it comes to so |
cial media the users shared content serve as information |
sources A social graph 27 is a representation of the users |
their shared posts and their social interactions and relation |
ships |
In this paper we model a social network as an oriented graph |
GV E where |
the set of vertices Vrepresents the social media users |
the set of directed edges Erepresents relationships and |
interactions in the network such as a post a repost a |
friendship a mention a reply and a follow |
A simplified social graph structure is shown in Figure 2 The |
edges that reflect the relations post repost mention and re |
ply contain the social posts and so represent the information |
sources We denote the set of these contentsharing edges by |
Ewith EE |
Figure 2 Social graph structure |
B Food diet users interests |
Each animal in the food chain has its own preferences in |
terms of food Wilde animal for instance choose their preys |
based on their environment their size and their hunting skills |
In information foraging the animal food diet is translated by |
the users information needs that we call the users interests |
The information foraging process takes two inputs a collec |
tion of posts represented by a social graph in addition to the |
users thematic interests These users interests can be ex |
pressed explicitly by the user or inferred implicitly from the |
users social media activity profile and interactions 14 |
The modeling of the users interests consists in extracting the |
terms that are the most representative of the users informa |
tion needs from the keywords given by the user andor the |
information accessible on their profile biography previous |
posts etc |
The extraction process includes tokenization stop words re |
moval stemming and Term Frequency TF calculation The |
words with the highest TF values are then stored into the |
users interests vector Ifollowing the bagofwords model |
Figure 3 illustrates the process of modeling the users topi |
cal interests by a vector of terms and using it in information |
foraging31 Y Drias et al |
Figure 3 Users interests extraction |
C Scent information scent |
The general goal of information access approaches is to of |
fer mechanisms that can help finding relevant information |
while minimizing the time spent doing the search Likewise |
the goal of animals in the wild is to find a decent amount |
of food whilst spending less energy To achieve that ani |
mals generally rely on their senses to locate and hunt their |
preys in an effective way The authors of the IFT notice that |
users have a similar behavior when looking for information |
on the Web The authors assume that when browsing the |
Web users exploit available hints and cues to estimate the |
information value contained in accessible pages and there |
fore decide which pages to visit This can be achieved thanks |
to the information scent concept 28 which can be seen in |
real life as the users estimation of the value that a source |
of information will deliver to them This value is primarily |
computed based on the sources descriptioncontent In the |
case of the Web for instance information sources are Web |
pages which are described by a URL a title and in certain |
cases an icon |
The goal in our context is to find relevant posts to satisfy a |
specific users information needs We presume that if a post |
is related to the users interests it will be more appealing to |
them and that the information scent value should increase as |
we get closer to a relevant post and decrease otherwise We |
define the information scent as the similarity evolution be |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.