IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/jikmxx/v17y2018i01ns0219649218500107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Recommendation Method Based on Semantic Similarity and Complementarity Using Weighted Taxonomy: A Case on Construction Materials Dataset

Author

Listed:
  • Karamollah Bagherifard

    (Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Arak University, Arak 38156-8-8349, Iran†Department of Computer Engineering, Yasooj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Yasooj, Iran)

  • Mohsen Rahmani

    (Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Arak University, Arak 38156-8-8349, Iran)

  • Vahid Rafe

    (Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Arak University, Arak 38156-8-8349, Iran)

  • Mehrbakhsh Nilashi

    (Faculty of Computing, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia4Department of Computer Engineering, Lahijan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Lahijan, Iran)

Abstract

Products and web pages are the main components of the e-commerce data knowledge and the relationship among them is an important issue to be highly considered in recommender systems. This study aims to focus on the similarity and complementarity relationships among the products that have wide applications in the recommender systems. In the previously proposed methods, products and their relationships were revealed using taxonomy and “IS-A” relationship. In addition, the similarity and complementarity calculations were conducted based on edge computation by assigning a similar degree to any edge. More specifically, the children of a concept in the taxonomy was supported by a similar father’s “IS-A” degree. In contrast, this study provides a new approach based on ontology, data mining, and automatic discovering algorithms for the relationships with different degrees for the edges among the concepts. Accordingly, these relationships are initialised according to the “IS-A” degree. With regard to this weighted taxonomy, the semantic similarity and complementarity are measured based on concept distance. In addition, the proposed recommender system is item-based, which uses semantic similarity and complementarity. The required data for the present study were collected from construction materials supplier. The results illustrated that our proposed method is effective for construction materials recommendation.

Suggested Citation

  • Karamollah Bagherifard & Mohsen Rahmani & Vahid Rafe & Mehrbakhsh Nilashi, 2018. "A Recommendation Method Based on Semantic Similarity and Complementarity Using Weighted Taxonomy: A Case on Construction Materials Dataset," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-26, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:jikmxx:v:17:y:2018:i:01:n:s0219649218500107
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219649218500107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219649218500107
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219649218500107?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schmidtke, Richard, 2006. "Private Provision of a Complementary Public Good," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 134, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    2. Catia Pesquita & Daniel Faria & André O Falcão & Phillip Lord & Francisco M Couto, 2009. "Semantic Similarity in Biomedical Ontologies," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(7), pages 1-12, July.
    3. Richard Schmidtke, 2006. "Private Provision of a Complementary Public Good," CESifo Working Paper Series 1756, CESifo.
    4. York Sure & Steffen Staab & Rudi Studer, 2009. "Ontology Engineering Methodology," International Handbooks on Information Systems, in: Steffen Staab & Rudi Studer (ed.), Handbook on Ontologies, pages 135-152, Springer.
    5. Richard Schmidtke, 2006. "Private Provision of a Complementary Public Good," Working Papers 004, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    6. Stuart E. Middleton & David De Roure & Nigel R. Shadbolt, 2009. "Ontology-Based Recommender Systems," International Handbooks on Information Systems, in: Steffen Staab & Rudi Studer (ed.), Handbook on Ontologies, pages 779-796, Springer.
    7. Schmidtke, Richard, 2006. "Private Provision of a Complementary Public Good," Discussion Papers in Economics 964, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    8. Veronika Grimm, 2004. "On Procurement Auctions Of Complementary Goods," Working Papers. Serie AD 2004-02, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Gastón Llanes, 2011. "Mixed Source," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(7), pages 1212-1230, July.
    2. Heijdra, Ben J. & Ligthart, Jenny E., 2007. "Fiscal policy, monopolistic competition, and finite lives," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 325-359, January.
    3. Bottai, Carlo, 2015. "Open Innovation in a Model à la Hotelling," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201526, University of Turin.
    4. Llanes, Gastón & de Elejalde, Ramiro, 2013. "Industry equilibrium with open-source and proprietary firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 36-49.
    5. Luigi Balletta & Antonio Tesoriere, 2020. "Cumulative innovation, open source, and distance to frontier," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(6), pages 1875-1920, December.
    6. Sebastian von Engelhardt, 2010. "Quality Competition or Quality Cooperation? License-Type and the Strategic Nature of Open Source vs. Closed Source Business Models," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-034, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    7. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    8. Charles Bettembourg & Christian Diot & Olivier Dameron, 2015. "Optimal Threshold Determination for Interpreting Semantic Similarity and Particularity: Application to the Comparison of Gene Sets and Metabolic Pathways Using GO and ChEBI," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-30, July.
    9. Kanchan Jha & Sriparna Saha & Pratik Dutta, 2024. "Incorporation of gene ontology in identification of protein interactions from biomedical corpus: a multi-modal approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 339(3), pages 1793-1811, August.
    10. Dongmin Bang & Sangsoo Lim & Sangseon Lee & Sun Kim, 2023. "Biomedical knowledge graph learning for drug repurposing by extending guilt-by-association to multiple layers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    11. Peng Wang & Shangwei Ning & Qianghu Wang & Ronghong Li & Jingrun Ye & Zuxianglan Zhao & Yan Li & Teng Huang & Xia Li, 2013. "mirTarPri: Improved Prioritization of MicroRNA Targets through Incorporation of Functional Genomics Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, January.
    12. Tom Narock & Lina Zhou & Victoria Yoon, 2013. "Semantic similarity of ontology instances using polarity mining," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 416-427, February.
    13. Xiaomei Wu & Erli Pang & Kui Lin & Zhen-Ming Pei, 2013. "Improving the Measurement of Semantic Similarity between Gene Ontology Terms and Gene Products: Insights from an Edge- and IC-Based Hybrid Method," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-11, May.
    14. Yi-An Chen & Lokesh P Tripathi & Benoit H Dessailly & Johan Nyström-Persson & Shandar Ahmad & Kenji Mizuguchi, 2014. "Integrated Pathway Clusters with Coherent Biological Themes for Target Prioritisation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-11, June.
    15. Fran Supek & Matko Bošnjak & Nives Škunca & Tomislav Šmuc, 2011. "REVIGO Summarizes and Visualizes Long Lists of Gene Ontology Terms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-9, July.
    16. Charles Bettembourg & Christian Diot & Olivier Dameron, 2014. "Semantic Particularity Measure for Functional Characterization of Gene Sets Using Gene Ontology," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, January.
    17. Adrian M Altenhoff & Romain A Studer & Marc Robinson-Rechavi & Christophe Dessimoz, 2012. "Resolving the Ortholog Conjecture: Orthologs Tend to Be Weakly, but Significantly, More Similar in Function than Paralogs," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-10, May.
    18. Cuihong Li & Laurens G. Debo, 2009. "Strategic dynamic sourcing from competing suppliers with transferable capacity investment," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(6), pages 540-562, September.
    19. Nurul Aswa Omar & Shahreen Kasim & Mohd. Farhan Md. Fuzzee & Azizul Azhar Ramli & Hairulnizam Mahdin & Seah Choon Sen, 2017. "A Review on Feature based Approach in Semantic Similarity for Multiple Ontology," Acta Informatica Malaysia (AIM), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 7-9, February.
    20. Laia Subirats & Luigi Ceccaroni & Felip Miralles, 2012. "Knowledge Representation for Prognosis of Health Status in Rehabilitation," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-14, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:jikmxx:v:17:y:2018:i:01:n:s0219649218500107. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/jikm/jikm.shtml .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.