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.