US20040261107A1 - Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders - Google Patents
Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20040261107A1 US20040261107A1 US10/867,175 US86717504A US2004261107A1 US 20040261107 A1 US20040261107 A1 US 20040261107A1 US 86717504 A US86717504 A US 86717504A US 2004261107 A1 US2004261107 A1 US 2004261107A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- viewing
- agent
- program
- history
- preferences
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04H—BROADCAST COMMUNICATION
- H04H60/00—Arrangements for broadcast applications with a direct linking to broadcast information or broadcast space-time; Broadcast-related systems
- H04H60/35—Arrangements for identifying or recognising characteristics with a direct linkage to broadcast information or to broadcast space-time, e.g. for identifying broadcast stations or for identifying users
- H04H60/46—Arrangements for identifying or recognising characteristics with a direct linkage to broadcast information or to broadcast space-time, e.g. for identifying broadcast stations or for identifying users for recognising users' preferences
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04N—PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION, e.g. TELEVISION
- H04N21/00—Selective content distribution, e.g. interactive television or video on demand [VOD]
- H04N21/40—Client devices specifically adapted for the reception of or interaction with content, e.g. set-top-box [STB]; Operations thereof
- H04N21/45—Management operations performed by the client for facilitating the reception of or the interaction with the content or administrating data related to the end-user or to the client device itself, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies, resolving scheduling conflicts
- H04N21/466—Learning process for intelligent management, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies
- H04N21/4667—Processing of monitored end-user data, e.g. trend analysis based on the log file of viewer selections
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04N—PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION, e.g. TELEVISION
- H04N21/00—Selective content distribution, e.g. interactive television or video on demand [VOD]
- H04N21/40—Client devices specifically adapted for the reception of or interaction with content, e.g. set-top-box [STB]; Operations thereof
- H04N21/43—Processing of content or additional data, e.g. demultiplexing additional data from a digital video stream; Elementary client operations, e.g. monitoring of home network or synchronising decoder's clock; Client middleware
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04N—PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION, e.g. TELEVISION
- H04N21/00—Selective content distribution, e.g. interactive television or video on demand [VOD]
- H04N21/40—Client devices specifically adapted for the reception of or interaction with content, e.g. set-top-box [STB]; Operations thereof
- H04N21/45—Management operations performed by the client for facilitating the reception of or the interaction with the content or administrating data related to the end-user or to the client device itself, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies, resolving scheduling conflicts
- H04N21/4508—Management of client data or end-user data
- H04N21/4532—Management of client data or end-user data involving end-user characteristics, e.g. viewer profile, preferences
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04N—PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION, e.g. TELEVISION
- H04N21/00—Selective content distribution, e.g. interactive television or video on demand [VOD]
- H04N21/40—Client devices specifically adapted for the reception of or interaction with content, e.g. set-top-box [STB]; Operations thereof
- H04N21/45—Management operations performed by the client for facilitating the reception of or the interaction with the content or administrating data related to the end-user or to the client device itself, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies, resolving scheduling conflicts
- H04N21/454—Content or additional data filtering, e.g. blocking advertisements
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04N—PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION, e.g. TELEVISION
- H04N21/00—Selective content distribution, e.g. interactive television or video on demand [VOD]
- H04N21/40—Client devices specifically adapted for the reception of or interaction with content, e.g. set-top-box [STB]; Operations thereof
- H04N21/45—Management operations performed by the client for facilitating the reception of or the interaction with the content or administrating data related to the end-user or to the client device itself, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies, resolving scheduling conflicts
- H04N21/466—Learning process for intelligent management, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04N—PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION, e.g. TELEVISION
- H04N21/00—Selective content distribution, e.g. interactive television or video on demand [VOD]
- H04N21/40—Client devices specifically adapted for the reception of or interaction with content, e.g. set-top-box [STB]; Operations thereof
- H04N21/45—Management operations performed by the client for facilitating the reception of or the interaction with the content or administrating data related to the end-user or to the client device itself, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies, resolving scheduling conflicts
- H04N21/466—Learning process for intelligent management, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies
- H04N21/4668—Learning process for intelligent management, e.g. learning user preferences for recommending movies for recommending content, e.g. movies
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04N—PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION, e.g. TELEVISION
- H04N21/00—Selective content distribution, e.g. interactive television or video on demand [VOD]
- H04N21/40—Client devices specifically adapted for the reception of or interaction with content, e.g. set-top-box [STB]; Operations thereof
- H04N21/47—End-user applications
- H04N21/475—End-user interface for inputting end-user data, e.g. personal identification number [PIN], preference data
- H04N21/4755—End-user interface for inputting end-user data, e.g. personal identification number [PIN], preference data for defining user preferences, e.g. favourite actors or genre
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04N—PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION, e.g. TELEVISION
- H04N7/00—Television systems
- H04N7/16—Analogue secrecy systems; Analogue subscription systems
- H04N7/162—Authorising the user terminal, e.g. by paying; Registering the use of a subscription channel, e.g. billing
- H04N7/163—Authorising the user terminal, e.g. by paying; Registering the use of a subscription channel, e.g. billing by receiver means only
Definitions
- the present invention relates to methods and apparatus for recommending television programming, and more particularly, to techniques for evaluating television program recommenders.
- EPGs electronic program guides
- EPGs Like printed television program guides, EPGs contain grids listing the available television programs by time and date, channel and title. Some EPGs, however, allow television viewers to sort or search the available television programs in accordance with personalized preferences. In addition, EPGs allow for on-screen presentation of the available television programs.
- EPGs allow viewers to identify desirable programs more efficiently than conventional printed guides, they suffer from a number of limitations, which if overcome, could further enhance the ability of viewers to identify desirable programs. For example, many viewers have a particular preference towards, or bias against, certain categories of programming, such as action-based programs or sports programming. Thus, the viewer preferences can be applied to the EPG to obtain a set of recommended programs that may be of interest to a particular viewer.
- the TivoTM system for example, commercially available from Tivo, Inc., of Sunnyvale, Calif., allows viewers to rate shows using a “Thumbs Up and Thumbs Down” feature and thereby indicate programs that the viewer likes and dislikes, respectively. Thereafter, the TiVo receiver matches the recorded viewer preferences with received program data, such as an EPG, to make recommendations tailored to each viewer.
- program data such as an EPG
- a viewing agent is programmed with a set of rules that characterize the viewing preferences of a modeled viewer. Viewing agents of varying complexity and having varying program preferences can be constructed by defining various rules that characterize program attributes, such as genre, actors and program duration.
- a viewing agent containing the programmed rules is applied to a set of training programs from an electronic program guide (EPG) to algorithmically obtain an agent viewing history, indicating whether the viewing agent would have liked or disliked each training program.
- EPG electronic program guide
- the generated agent viewing history is then processed by the profiler portion of the television program recommender being evaluated.
- the profiler derives an agent profile containing a set of inferred rules that attempt to mimic the programmed preferences of the viewing agent.
- the profiler attempts to derive the viewing habits of the viewing agent based on the set of programs that the viewing agent liked or disliked.
- the programmed rules of the viewing agent are applied to test data from an electronic program guide (EPG) to obtain an agent evaluation viewing set.
- the television program recommender generates a set of program recommendations by applying the agent profile generated during the training phase to the test data from the electronic program guide (EPG).
- the present invention can then compare the agent evaluation viewing set (generated from the programmed rules) with a set of program recommendations produced by the television program recommender being evaluated (generated from the inferred rules). In this manner, the effectiveness of the television program recommender can be evaluated.
- a method and apparatus are disclosed for determining the required size of the viewing history to provide a given level of accuracy.
- the size of the required viewing history can be obtained by utilizing viewing histories of varying sizes for the same viewing agent. Thereafter, the size of the viewing history required to exceed a predefined accuracy threshold can be obtained.
- the viewing agents can be programmed to introduce one or more random shows into the viewing history, allowing the television program recommender validator to determine how the program recommender processes such noise.
- the viewing agents can be programmed to gradually change the programmed viewer preferences over time, allowing the television program recommender validator to determine how the program recommender responds to such changes.
- FIG. 1A illustrates a television program recommender validator in accordance with a training phase of the present invention
- FIG. 1B illustrates a television program recommender validator in accordance with an evaluation phase of the present invention
- FIG. 2 is a schematic block diagram of the television program recommender validator of FIG. 1B;
- FIG. 3 is a flow chart describing the validation process (training phase) of FIG. 2 embodying principles of the present invention
- FIG. 4 is a flow chart describing the validation process (evaluation phase) of FIG. 2 embodying principles of the present invention
- FIG. 5 is a flow chart describing the sensitivity analysis process of FIG. 2 embodying principles of the present invention
- FIG. 6A illustrates a confusion matrix that analyzes whether a viewing agent would have liked a given show according to the programmed preferences and whether the program recommender actually recommended the show;
- FIG. 6B illustrates a plot of the precision and recall values of the training data as a function of the number of shows viewed (size of viewing history).
- FIG. 6C illustrates a plot of the number of shows viewed varying as a function of the complexity of the viewing agent.
- FIGS. 1A and 1B illustrate a television program recommender validator 200 , discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 2, in accordance with a training phase and evaluation phase, respectively, of the present invention.
- the television program recommender validator 200 evaluates the effectiveness of a television program recommender 160 by evaluating program recommendations generated by the television program recommender 160 for one or more programmed viewing agents 120 (or algorithmic viewers).
- a viewing agent 120 is any programmed viewer whose viewing habits are predetermined.
- Each viewing agent 120 is programmed with a set of rules that categorize the viewing preferences of the modeled viewer.
- Viewing agents 120 of varying complexity and having varying program preferences can be constructed in accordance with the present invention by defining various rules that characterize programs by their attributes. For example, a viewing agent 120 may be programmed with a strong preference for programs that belong to one or more particular genres, such as the “action” genre. In further variations, viewing agents 120 may be programmed with a preference for shows containing one or more identified actors and having a given duration.
- a viewing agent 120 is programmed with a strong preference for programs that belong to the action genre, all action shows should be identified by the program recommender 160 .
- the programs identified directly from the programmed rules of the viewing agent 120 in accordance with the present invention can be compared with the program recommendations 130 produced by the television program recommender 160 utilizing inferred rules contained in an agent profile 140 . In this manner, the effectiveness of the television program recommender 160 can be evaluated.
- the television program recommender validator 200 estimates the size of the viewing history needed for the television program recommender 160 to provide results with a predefined reliability.
- the size of the required viewing history can be obtained by utilizing viewing histories of varying sizes for the same viewing agent 120 . Thereafter, the size of the viewing history required to exceed a predefined accuracy can be obtained.
- the present invention can evaluate any television program recommender 160 , such as the television program recommenders 160 described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. ______, filed ______, entitled “Method and Apparatus for Recommending Television Programming Using Decision Trees,” (Attorney Docket No. 700772) and U.S. patent application Ser. No. ______, filed ______, entitled “Bayesian TV Show Recommender,” (Attorney Docket No. 700690), or the TivoTM system, commercially available from Tivo, Inc., of Sunnyvale, Calif. It is noted that the profiler 130 is generally a component of the television program recommender 160 .
- FIG. 1A illustrates a training phase of the present invention.
- the present invention applies the viewing agent 120 containing the programmed rules to a set of training programs from an electronic program guide (EPG) 110 to algorithmically obtain an agent viewing history 125 .
- the agent viewing history 125 indicates whether the viewing agent 120 would have liked or disliked each of the training programs 110 .
- the profiler portion 130 of the television program recommender 160 (FIG. 1B) being evaluated then processes the agent viewing history 125 to derive an agent profile 140 containing a set of inferred rules that mimic the programmed preferences of the viewing agent 120 .
- the profiler 130 attempts to derive the viewing habits of the viewing agent 120 based on the set of programs that the viewing agent 120 liked or disliked.
- more accurate program recommenders 160 will generate sets of inferred rules that more closely resemble the programmed rules of the viewing agent 120 .
- FIG. 1B illustrates an evaluation phase of the present invention.
- the evaluation phase applies the programmed rules of the viewing agent 120 to a set of test data 150 from an electronic program guide (EPG) to obtain an agent evaluation viewing set 170 .
- EPG electronic program guide
- the television program recommender validator 200 compares the agent evaluation viewing set 170 with a set of program recommendations 180 produced by the television program recommender 160 being evaluated.
- the television program recommender 160 generates the program recommendations 180 by applying the agent profile 140 generated during the training phase to the test data 150 from an electronic program guide (EPG).
- EPG electronic program guide
- FIG. 2 is a schematic block diagram of the television program recommender validator 200 .
- the television program recommender validator 200 may be embodied as any computing device, such as a personal computer or workstation, that contains a processor 210 , such as a central processing unit (CPU), and memory 220 , such as RAM and ROM.
- the program recommender validator 200 contains a validation process (training phase) 300 , discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 3, a validation process (evaluation phase) 400 , discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 4, and a sensitivity analysis process 500 , discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 5.
- the validation process (training phase) 300 implements the training phase, discussed above, to generate the agent profile 140 .
- the validation process (evaluation phase) 400 implements the evaluation phase, discussed above, to compare the agent evaluation viewing set 170 generated directly from the programmed rules for the viewing agent 120 with a set of program recommendations 180 produced by the television program recommender 160 being evaluated.
- the sensitivity analysis process 500 estimates the size of the viewing history needed for the television program recommender 160 to provide results with a predefined reliability.
- FIG. 3 is a flow chart describing the validation process (training phase) 300 embodying principles of the present invention.
- the validation process (training phase) 300 implements the training phase, discussed above, to generate the agent profile 140 .
- the validation process (training phase) 300 initially constructs a viewing agent 120 by defining various rules that characterize programs by their attributes as being liked or disliked during step 310 .
- the test data from the electronic program guide (EPG) 110 is then applied to the programmed rules of the viewing agent 120 during step 320 to generate the agent viewing history 125 .
- EPG electronic program guide
- the profiler 130 is applied to the agent viewing history 125 during step 330 to identify the inferred rules that characterize the agent viewing history 125 . Program control then terminates.
- FIG. 4 is a flow chart describing the validation process (evaluation phase) 400 embodying principles of the present invention.
- the validation process (evaluation phase) 400 implements the evaluation phase, discussed above, to compare the agent evaluation viewing set 170 generated directly from the programmed rules for the viewing agent 120 with a set of program recommendations 180 produced by the television program recommender 160 being evaluated.
- the validation process (evaluation phase) 400 initially applies the test data from the EPG 150 to the programmed rules of the viewing agent 120 during step 410 to generate the agent evaluation viewing set 170 indicating programs that the programmed viewing agent 120 would watch. Thereafter, the validation process (evaluation phase) 400 applies the test data from the EPG 150 to the TV recommender 160 , using the agent profile 140 generated during the training phase, to generate a set of program recommendations 180 during step 420 .
- step 430 the validation process (evaluation phase) 400 then compares the set of programs 170 identified during step 410 from the program rules with the set of program recommendations 180 identified by the program recommender 160 during step 420 from the inferred rules.
- the effectiveness of the television program recommender 160 can be evaluated during step 440 , based on the comparison.
- the effectiveness of the television program recommender 160 can be evaluated using well-known pattern recognition techniques, such as the mean square error, precision and recall (discussed below) or receiver operator characteristic curves. Program control then terminates.
- FIG. 5 is a flow chart describing the sensitivity analysis process 500 embodying principles of the present invention.
- the sensitivity analysis process 500 estimates the size of the viewing history needed for the television program recommender 160 to provide results with a predefined reliability or accuracy.
- the sensitivity analysis process 300 initially generates viewer agents of varying complexity during step 510 .
- the sensitivity analysis process 500 then generates viewing histories of varying size during step 520 .
- the validation process (evaluation) 400 is then executed during step 525 for each viewing history size and viewing agent 120 to compare the agent evaluation viewing set 170 generated directly from the programmed rules for the viewing agent 120 with a set of program recommendations 180 produced by the television program recommender 160 being evaluated.
- TP indicates the true positives
- FP indicates the false positives
- CT column total
- FN indicates the false negatives and the row total, RT, is equal to TP plus FN.
- the concepts and calculations for precision and recall are discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 6A.
- the required size of the viewing history for the precision and recall to exceed a predefined threshold is then determined during step 550 and the size of viewing history is plotted as a function of the complexity of the viewing agent 120 during step 560 .
- Program control then terminates.
- FIG. 6A illustrates a well-known confusion matrix 600 that analyzes whether the viewing agent 120 would have liked a given show according to the programmed preferences (satisfied rules in profile), and whether the program recommender 160 actually recommended the show.
- the confusion matrix 600 indicates the true positives (TP), false positives (FP), true negatives (TN) and false negatives (FN).
- FIG. 6B illustrates a plot 650 of the precision and recall values as a function of the number of shows viewed (size of the viewing history).
- the precision and recall values vary between values of zero and one, and generally increase as the size of the viewing history increases.
- the size of the viewing history can be adjusted such that both the precision and recall values exceed a predefined threshold.
- FIG. 6C illustrates a plot 680 of the size of the viewing history needed to achieve a given level of accuracy or reliability, as a function of the complexity of the viewing agent 120 .
- the number of shows that must be included in the viewing history must be increased to achieve a given accuracy level as the complexity of the viewing agent 120 increases.
- the viewing agents 120 can be programmed to introduce one or more random shows into the viewing history 125 and thereby determine how the program recommender 160 processes such noise. In a further variation, the viewing agents 120 can be programmed to gradually change the programmed viewer preferences over time, and thereby determine how the program recommender 160 responds to such changes.
Abstract
A method and apparatus for validating recommendations generated by a television program recommender uses programmed viewing agents, in which a viewing agent is programmed with a set of rules that characterize the viewing preferences of a modeled viewer. During a training phase, the programmed rules of a viewing agent are applied to a set of training programs to obtain an agent viewing history, which is processed by a profiler to derive an agent profile containing a set of inferred rules. During an evaluation phase, the programmed rules of the viewing agent are applied to test programs to obtain an agent evaluation viewing set. In parallel, the television program recommender generates a set of program recommendations by applying the agent profile to the test programs. The agent evaluation viewing set is then compared with the program recommendations.
Description
- The present invention relates to methods and apparatus for recommending television programming, and more particularly, to techniques for evaluating television program recommenders.
- As the number of channels available to television viewers has increased, along with the diversity of the programming content available on such channels, it has become increasingly challenging for television viewers to identify television programs of interest. Historically, television viewers identified television programs of interest by analyzing printed television program guides. Typically, such printed television program guides contained grids listing the available television programs by time and date, channel and title. As the number of television programs has increased, it has become increasingly difficult to effectively identify desirable television programs using such printed guides.
- More recently, television program guides have become available in an electronic format, often referred to as electronic program guides (EPGs). Like printed television program guides, EPGs contain grids listing the available television programs by time and date, channel and title. Some EPGs, however, allow television viewers to sort or search the available television programs in accordance with personalized preferences. In addition, EPGs allow for on-screen presentation of the available television programs.
- While EPGs allow viewers to identify desirable programs more efficiently than conventional printed guides, they suffer from a number of limitations, which if overcome, could further enhance the ability of viewers to identify desirable programs. For example, many viewers have a particular preference towards, or bias against, certain categories of programming, such as action-based programs or sports programming. Thus, the viewer preferences can be applied to the EPG to obtain a set of recommended programs that may be of interest to a particular viewer.
- Thus, a number of tools have been proposed or suggested for recommending television programming. The Tivo™ system, for example, commercially available from Tivo, Inc., of Sunnyvale, Calif., allows viewers to rate shows using a “Thumbs Up and Thumbs Down” feature and thereby indicate programs that the viewer likes and dislikes, respectively. Thereafter, the TiVo receiver matches the recorded viewer preferences with received program data, such as an EPG, to make recommendations tailored to each viewer.
- There is currently no way, however, to validate the recommendations generated by such tools for recommending television programming, short of testing the tools with human volunteers. In addition, there is no way to determine when the recommendations have achieved a given level of accuracy. A need therefore exists for a method and apparatus for validating recommendations generated by a television program recommender. A further need exists for a method and apparatus for determining when the size of the viewing history (record of shows watched/not watched) is sufficient to provide a given level of accuracy.
- Generally, a method and apparatus are disclosed for evaluating the effectiveness of a television program recommender by evaluating program recommendations generated by the television program recommender for one or more programmed viewing agents. A viewing agent is programmed with a set of rules that characterize the viewing preferences of a modeled viewer. Viewing agents of varying complexity and having varying program preferences can be constructed by defining various rules that characterize program attributes, such as genre, actors and program duration.
- During a training phase of the present invention, a viewing agent containing the programmed rules is applied to a set of training programs from an electronic program guide (EPG) to algorithmically obtain an agent viewing history, indicating whether the viewing agent would have liked or disliked each training program. The generated agent viewing history is then processed by the profiler portion of the television program recommender being evaluated. The profiler derives an agent profile containing a set of inferred rules that attempt to mimic the programmed preferences of the viewing agent. Thus, the profiler attempts to derive the viewing habits of the viewing agent based on the set of programs that the viewing agent liked or disliked.
- During an evaluation phase of the present invention, the programmed rules of the viewing agent are applied to test data from an electronic program guide (EPG) to obtain an agent evaluation viewing set. In parallel, the television program recommender generates a set of program recommendations by applying the agent profile generated during the training phase to the test data from the electronic program guide (EPG). The present invention can then compare the agent evaluation viewing set (generated from the programmed rules) with a set of program recommendations produced by the television program recommender being evaluated (generated from the inferred rules). In this manner, the effectiveness of the television program recommender can be evaluated.
- According to another aspect of the invention, a method and apparatus are disclosed for determining the required size of the viewing history to provide a given level of accuracy. Generally, the size of the required viewing history can be obtained by utilizing viewing histories of varying sizes for the same viewing agent. Thereafter, the size of the viewing history required to exceed a predefined accuracy threshold can be obtained.
- The viewing agents can be programmed to introduce one or more random shows into the viewing history, allowing the television program recommender validator to determine how the program recommender processes such noise. In a further variation, the viewing agents can be programmed to gradually change the programmed viewer preferences over time, allowing the television program recommender validator to determine how the program recommender responds to such changes.
- A more complete understanding of the present invention, as well as further features and advantages of the present invention, will be obtained by reference to the following detailed description and drawings.
- FIG. 1A illustrates a television program recommender validator in accordance with a training phase of the present invention;
- FIG. 1B illustrates a television program recommender validator in accordance with an evaluation phase of the present invention;
- FIG. 2 is a schematic block diagram of the television program recommender validator of FIG. 1B;
- FIG. 3 is a flow chart describing the validation process (training phase) of FIG. 2 embodying principles of the present invention;
- FIG. 4 is a flow chart describing the validation process (evaluation phase) of FIG. 2 embodying principles of the present invention;
- FIG. 5 is a flow chart describing the sensitivity analysis process of FIG. 2 embodying principles of the present invention;
- FIG. 6A illustrates a confusion matrix that analyzes whether a viewing agent would have liked a given show according to the programmed preferences and whether the program recommender actually recommended the show;
- FIG. 6B illustrates a plot of the precision and recall values of the training data as a function of the number of shows viewed (size of viewing history); and
- FIG. 6C illustrates a plot of the number of shows viewed varying as a function of the complexity of the viewing agent.
- FIGS. 1A and 1B illustrate a television
program recommender validator 200, discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 2, in accordance with a training phase and evaluation phase, respectively, of the present invention. According to one aspect of the present invention, the televisionprogram recommender validator 200 evaluates the effectiveness of atelevision program recommender 160 by evaluating program recommendations generated by the television program recommender 160 for one or more programmed viewing agents 120 (or algorithmic viewers). As used herein, aviewing agent 120 is any programmed viewer whose viewing habits are predetermined. Eachviewing agent 120 is programmed with a set of rules that categorize the viewing preferences of the modeled viewer. - Viewing
agents 120 of varying complexity and having varying program preferences can be constructed in accordance with the present invention by defining various rules that characterize programs by their attributes. For example, aviewing agent 120 may be programmed with a strong preference for programs that belong to one or more particular genres, such as the “action” genre. In further variations,viewing agents 120 may be programmed with a preference for shows containing one or more identified actors and having a given duration. - For example, if a
viewing agent 120 is programmed with a strong preference for programs that belong to the action genre, all action shows should be identified by theprogram recommender 160. The programs identified directly from the programmed rules of theviewing agent 120 in accordance with the present invention can be compared with theprogram recommendations 130 produced by thetelevision program recommender 160 utilizing inferred rules contained in anagent profile 140. In this manner, the effectiveness of thetelevision program recommender 160 can be evaluated. - According to another aspect of the invention, the television
program recommender validator 200 estimates the size of the viewing history needed for thetelevision program recommender 160 to provide results with a predefined reliability. Generally, the size of the required viewing history can be obtained by utilizing viewing histories of varying sizes for thesame viewing agent 120. Thereafter, the size of the viewing history required to exceed a predefined accuracy can be obtained. - The present invention can evaluate any
television program recommender 160, such as the television program recommenders 160 described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. ______, filed ______, entitled “Method and Apparatus for Recommending Television Programming Using Decision Trees,” (Attorney Docket No. 700772) and U.S. patent application Ser. No. ______, filed ______, entitled “Bayesian TV Show Recommender,” (Attorney Docket No. 700690), or the Tivo™ system, commercially available from Tivo, Inc., of Sunnyvale, Calif. It is noted that theprofiler 130 is generally a component of thetelevision program recommender 160. - FIG. 1A illustrates a training phase of the present invention. The present invention applies the
viewing agent 120 containing the programmed rules to a set of training programs from an electronic program guide (EPG) 110 to algorithmically obtain anagent viewing history 125. Theagent viewing history 125 indicates whether theviewing agent 120 would have liked or disliked each of the training programs 110. - As shown in FIG. 1A, the
profiler portion 130 of the television program recommender 160 (FIG. 1B) being evaluated then processes theagent viewing history 125 to derive anagent profile 140 containing a set of inferred rules that mimic the programmed preferences of theviewing agent 120. Thus, theprofiler 130 attempts to derive the viewing habits of theviewing agent 120 based on the set of programs that theviewing agent 120 liked or disliked. Generally, moreaccurate program recommenders 160 will generate sets of inferred rules that more closely resemble the programmed rules of theviewing agent 120. - FIG. 1B illustrates an evaluation phase of the present invention. Generally, the evaluation phase applies the programmed rules of the
viewing agent 120 to a set oftest data 150 from an electronic program guide (EPG) to obtain an agentevaluation viewing set 170. The televisionprogram recommender validator 200 then compares the agent evaluation viewing set 170 with a set ofprogram recommendations 180 produced by thetelevision program recommender 160 being evaluated. Thetelevision program recommender 160 generates theprogram recommendations 180 by applying theagent profile 140 generated during the training phase to thetest data 150 from an electronic program guide (EPG). - FIG. 2 is a schematic block diagram of the television
program recommender validator 200. The televisionprogram recommender validator 200 may be embodied as any computing device, such as a personal computer or workstation, that contains aprocessor 210, such as a central processing unit (CPU), andmemory 220, such as RAM and ROM. As shown in FIG. 2, theprogram recommender validator 200 contains a validation process (training phase) 300, discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 3, a validation process (evaluation phase) 400, discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 4, and asensitivity analysis process 500, discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 5. - Generally, the validation process (training phase)300 implements the training phase, discussed above, to generate the
agent profile 140. The validation process (evaluation phase) 400 implements the evaluation phase, discussed above, to compare the agent evaluation viewing set 170 generated directly from the programmed rules for theviewing agent 120 with a set ofprogram recommendations 180 produced by thetelevision program recommender 160 being evaluated. Thesensitivity analysis process 500 estimates the size of the viewing history needed for thetelevision program recommender 160 to provide results with a predefined reliability. - FIG. 3 is a flow chart describing the validation process (training phase)300 embodying principles of the present invention. The validation process (training phase) 300 implements the training phase, discussed above, to generate the
agent profile 140. As shown in FIG. 3, the validation process (training phase) 300 initially constructs aviewing agent 120 by defining various rules that characterize programs by their attributes as being liked or disliked during step 310. The test data from the electronic program guide (EPG) 110 is then applied to the programmed rules of theviewing agent 120 duringstep 320 to generate theagent viewing history 125. - Finally, the
profiler 130 is applied to theagent viewing history 125 duringstep 330 to identify the inferred rules that characterize theagent viewing history 125. Program control then terminates. - FIG. 4 is a flow chart describing the validation process (evaluation phase)400 embodying principles of the present invention. The validation process (evaluation phase) 400 implements the evaluation phase, discussed above, to compare the agent evaluation viewing set 170 generated directly from the programmed rules for the
viewing agent 120 with a set ofprogram recommendations 180 produced by thetelevision program recommender 160 being evaluated. - As shown in FIG. 4, the validation process (evaluation phase)400 initially applies the test data from the
EPG 150 to the programmed rules of theviewing agent 120 duringstep 410 to generate the agent evaluation viewing set 170 indicating programs that the programmedviewing agent 120 would watch. Thereafter, the validation process (evaluation phase) 400 applies the test data from theEPG 150 to theTV recommender 160, using theagent profile 140 generated during the training phase, to generate a set ofprogram recommendations 180 duringstep 420. - During
step 430, the validation process (evaluation phase) 400 then compares the set ofprograms 170 identified duringstep 410 from the program rules with the set ofprogram recommendations 180 identified by theprogram recommender 160 duringstep 420 from the inferred rules. - Finally, the effectiveness of the
television program recommender 160 can be evaluated duringstep 440, based on the comparison. For example, the effectiveness of thetelevision program recommender 160 can be evaluated using well-known pattern recognition techniques, such as the mean square error, precision and recall (discussed below) or receiver operator characteristic curves. Program control then terminates. - FIG. 5 is a flow chart describing the
sensitivity analysis process 500 embodying principles of the present invention. Generally, thesensitivity analysis process 500 estimates the size of the viewing history needed for thetelevision program recommender 160 to provide results with a predefined reliability or accuracy. - As shown in FIG. 5, the
sensitivity analysis process 300 initially generates viewer agents of varying complexity duringstep 510. For eachviewing agent 120, thesensitivity analysis process 500 then generates viewing histories of varying size duringstep 520. The validation process (evaluation) 400 is then executed during step 525 for each viewing history size andviewing agent 120 to compare the agent evaluation viewing set 170 generated directly from the programmed rules for theviewing agent 120 with a set ofprogram recommendations 180 produced by thetelevision program recommender 160 being evaluated. -
- where TP indicates the true positives, FP indicates the false positives, and the column total, CT, is equal to the TP plus the FP.
-
- where FN indicates the false negatives and the row total, RT, is equal to TP plus FN.
- The concepts and calculations for precision and recall are discussed further below in conjunction with FIG. 6A. The required size of the viewing history for the precision and recall to exceed a predefined threshold is then determined during
step 550 and the size of viewing history is plotted as a function of the complexity of theviewing agent 120 duringstep 560. Program control then terminates. - FIG. 6A illustrates a well-known
confusion matrix 600 that analyzes whether theviewing agent 120 would have liked a given show according to the programmed preferences (satisfied rules in profile), and whether theprogram recommender 160 actually recommended the show. Theconfusion matrix 600 indicates the true positives (TP), false positives (FP), true negatives (TN) and false negatives (FN). Theconfusion matrix 600 also indicates the row total (RT=TP+FN) and the column total (CT=TP+FP). - In accordance with well-known pattern recognition techniques, such as those described in Boreczky and Rowe, “Comparison of Video Shot Boundary Detection Techniques,” SPIE, Vol. 2670, 170-79 (1996), incorporated by reference herein, the precision and recall of the training set can be evaluated according to the following expressions:
- FIG. 6B illustrates a
plot 650 of the precision and recall values as a function of the number of shows viewed (size of the viewing history). The precision and recall values vary between values of zero and one, and generally increase as the size of the viewing history increases. To obtain a desired degree of accuracy in accordance with the present invention, the size of the viewing history can be adjusted such that both the precision and recall values exceed a predefined threshold. - FIG. 6C illustrates a
plot 680 of the size of the viewing history needed to achieve a given level of accuracy or reliability, as a function of the complexity of theviewing agent 120. Clearly, the number of shows that must be included in the viewing history must be increased to achieve a given accuracy level as the complexity of theviewing agent 120 increases. - In one variation, the
viewing agents 120 can be programmed to introduce one or more random shows into theviewing history 125 and thereby determine how theprogram recommender 160 processes such noise. In a further variation, theviewing agents 120 can be programmed to gradually change the programmed viewer preferences over time, and thereby determine how theprogram recommender 160 responds to such changes. - It is to be understood that the embodiments and variations shown and described herein are merely illustrative of the principles of this invention and that various modifications may be implemented by those skilled in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention.
Claims (30)
1. A method for validating program recommendations produced by a program recommender, comprising the steps of:
generating a viewing agent using one or more programmed rules that characterize viewing preferences;
applying said programmed rules to a set of training programs to obtain an agent viewing history;
processing said agent viewing history with a profiler to derive an agent profile containing a set of inferred rules;
applying said programmed rules to a set of test programs to obtain an agent evaluation viewing set;
generating said program recommendations produced by said program recommender by applying said agent profile to said test programs; and
comparing said agent evaluation viewing set with said program recommendations.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein said viewing agent is selected to have viewing habits that model the viewing habits of a type of viewer.
3. The method of claim 1 , wherein said agent viewing history contains an indication of whether said viewing agent liked or disliked each program in a set of training programs.
4. The method of claim 1 , wherein said agent evaluation viewing set contains an indication of whether said viewing agent liked or disliked each program in a set of test programs.
5. The method of claim 1 , wherein said viewing preferences characterize programs by their attributes that are liked or disliked by said viewing agent.
6. The method of claim 1 , wherein said profiler is a component of said program recommender.
7. The method of claim 1 , wherein said inferred rules mimic said programmed preferences of the viewing agent.
8. The method of claim 1 , wherein said viewing preferences include one or more random programs.
9. The method of claim 1 , wherein said viewing preferences change over time.
10. The method of claim 1 , wherein said comparing step further comprises the step of comparing calculated precision and recall values to a predefined level of accuracy.
11. A method for validating program recommendations produced by a program recommender using a viewing agent having programmed viewing preferences, said method comprising the steps of:
processing a viewing history of said viewing agent using a profiler to generate an agent profile, said agent profile containing a set of inferred rules that characterize said programmed viewing preferences;
applying said programmed viewing preferences to a set of test programs to obtain an agent evaluation viewing set;
generating said program recommendations produced by said program recommender by applying said agent profile to said test programs; and
comparing said agent evaluation viewing set with said program recommendations.
12. The method of claim 11 , wherein said viewing agent is selected to have viewing habits that model the viewing habits of a type of viewer.
13. The method of claim 11 , wherein said agent viewing history contains an indication of whether said viewing agent liked or disliked each program in a set of training programs.
14. The method of claim 11 , wherein said agent evaluation viewing set contains an indication of whether said viewing agent liked or disliked each program in a set of test programs.
15. The method of claim 11 , wherein said viewing preferences characterize programs by their attributes that are liked or disliked by said viewing agent.
16. The method of claim 11 , wherein said profiler is a component of said program recommender.
17. The method of claim 11 , wherein said inferred rules mimic said programmed preferences of the viewing agent.
18. The method of claim 11 , wherein said viewing preferences include one or more random programs.
19. The method of claim 11 , wherein said viewing preferences change over time.
20. The method of claim 11 , wherein said comparing step further comprises the step of comparing calculated precision and recall values to a predefined level of accuracy.
21. A method for determining the required size of a viewing history for a program recommender to provide a given level of accuracy, said method comprising the steps of:
generating a plurality of viewer agents of varying complexity;
generating viewing histories of varying size for each of said viewing agents;
determining the precision for each viewing history size and viewing agent;
determining the recall for each viewing history size and viewing agent; and
determining a required size for said viewing history such that said precision and recall values exceed a predefined threshold.
24. A method for determining the required size of a viewing history for a program recommender to provide a given level of accuracy for a user, said method comprising the steps of:
generating a viewing agent using one or more programmed rules that characterize viewing preferences;
generating a plurality of viewing histories of varying sizes for said viewing agent;
determining the precision for each viewing history;
determining the recall for each viewing history; and
determining a required size for said viewing history such that said precision and recall values exceed a predefined threshold.
25. A method for determining the required size of a viewing history for a program recommender to provide a given level of accuracy, said method comprising the steps of:
generating a plurality of viewer agents with varying program preferences;
generating viewing histories of varying size for each of said viewing agents;
determining the precision for each viewing history size and viewing agent;
determining the recall for each viewing history size and viewing agent; and
determining a required size for said viewing history such that said precision and recall values exceed a predefined threshold.
26. A system for validating program recommendations produced by a program recommender, comprising:
a memory for storing computer readable code; and
a processor operatively coupled to said memory, said processor configured to:
generate a viewing agent using one or more programmed rules that characterize viewing preferences;
apply said programmed rules to a set of training programs to obtain an agent viewing history;
process said agent viewing history with a profiler to derive an agent profile containing a set of inferred rules;
apply said programmed rules to a set of test programs to obtain an agent evaluation viewing set;
generate said program recommendations produced by said program recommender by applying said agent profile to said test programs; and
compare said agent evaluation viewing set with said program recommendations.
27. A system for validating program recommendations produced by a program recommender using a viewing agent having programmed viewing preferences, comprising:
a memory for storing computer readable code; and
a processor operatively coupled to said memory, said processor configured to:
process a viewing history of said viewing agent using a profiler to generate an agent profile, said agent profile containing a set of inferred rules that characterize said programmed viewing preferences;
apply said programmed viewing preferences to a set of test programs to obtain an agent evaluation viewing set;
generate said program recommendations produced by said program recommender by applying said agent profile to said test programs; and
compare said agent evaluation viewing set with said program recommendations.
28. A system for determining the required size of a viewing history for a program recommender to provide a given level of accuracy, comprising:
a memory for storing computer readable code; and
a processor operatively coupled to said memory, said processor configured to:
generate a plurality of viewer agents of varying complexity;
generate viewing histories of varying size for each of said viewing agents;
determine the precision for each viewing history size and viewing agent;
determine the recall for each viewing history size and viewing agent; and
determine a required size for said viewing history such that said precision and recall values exceed a predefined threshold.
29. A system for determining the required size of a viewing history for a program recommender to provide a given level of accuracy for a user, comprising:
a memory for storing computer readable code; and
a processor operatively coupled to said memory, said processor configured to:
generate a viewing agent using one or more programmed rules that characterize viewing preferences;
generate a plurality of viewing histories of varying sizes for said viewing agent;
determine the precision for each viewing history;
determine the recall for each viewing history; and
determine a required size for said viewing history such that said precision and recall values exceed a predefined threshold.
30. A system for determining the required size of a viewing history for a program recommender to provide a given level of accuracy, comprising:
a memory for storing computer readable code; and
a processor operatively coupled to said memory, said processor configured to:
generate a plurality of viewer agents with varying program preferences;
generate viewing histories of varying size for each of said viewing agents;
determine the precision for each viewing history size and viewing agent;
determine the recall for each viewing history size and viewing agent; and
determine a required size for said viewing history such that said precision and recall values exceed a predefined threshold.
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US10/867,175 US20040261107A1 (en) | 2000-02-08 | 2004-06-14 | Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders |
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US09/500,306 US6766525B1 (en) | 2000-02-08 | 2000-02-08 | Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders |
US10/867,175 US20040261107A1 (en) | 2000-02-08 | 2004-06-14 | Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US09/500,306 Division US6766525B1 (en) | 2000-02-08 | 2000-02-08 | Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20040261107A1 true US20040261107A1 (en) | 2004-12-23 |
Family
ID=23988838
Family Applications (2)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US09/500,306 Expired - Fee Related US6766525B1 (en) | 2000-02-08 | 2000-02-08 | Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders |
US10/867,175 Abandoned US20040261107A1 (en) | 2000-02-08 | 2004-06-14 | Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders |
Family Applications Before (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US09/500,306 Expired - Fee Related US6766525B1 (en) | 2000-02-08 | 2000-02-08 | Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders |
Country Status (5)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (2) | US6766525B1 (en) |
EP (1) | EP1186168A2 (en) |
JP (1) | JP2003522499A (en) |
KR (1) | KR20010114240A (en) |
WO (1) | WO2001060063A2 (en) |
Cited By (3)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20040024777A1 (en) * | 2002-07-30 | 2004-02-05 | Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. | Controlling the growth of a features frequency profile |
US20150319181A1 (en) * | 2014-04-30 | 2015-11-05 | Twitter, Inc. | Application Graph Builder |
CN109963174A (en) * | 2019-01-28 | 2019-07-02 | 北京奇艺世纪科技有限公司 | Flow index of correlation predictor method, device and computer readable storage medium |
Families Citing this family (27)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US8108245B1 (en) | 1999-09-17 | 2012-01-31 | Cox Communications, Inc. | Method and system for web user profiling and selective content delivery |
US7979880B2 (en) * | 2000-04-21 | 2011-07-12 | Cox Communications, Inc. | Method and system for profiling iTV users and for providing selective content delivery |
US8302127B2 (en) * | 2000-09-25 | 2012-10-30 | Thomson Licensing | System and method for personalized TV |
US7581237B1 (en) * | 2000-10-30 | 2009-08-25 | Pace Plc | Method and apparatus for generating television program recommendations based on prior queries |
US20030097186A1 (en) * | 2001-11-13 | 2003-05-22 | Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V | Method and apparatus for generating a stereotypical profile for recommending items of interest using feature-based clustering |
US20030126227A1 (en) * | 2001-12-31 | 2003-07-03 | Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V | Method of populating an explicit profile |
CN1640118A (en) * | 2002-03-06 | 2005-07-13 | 皇家飞利浦电子股份有限公司 | System for recommending program information in accordance with user preferences |
US7886332B2 (en) * | 2002-03-19 | 2011-02-08 | Canon Kabushiki Kaisha | Television broadcast receiving apparatus |
US8006266B2 (en) | 2002-06-24 | 2011-08-23 | Pace LLC | Method for using only feedback from shows that improve the performance of the recommender system |
US7389243B2 (en) | 2003-01-31 | 2008-06-17 | Gross John N | Notification system and method for media queue |
US20040244029A1 (en) * | 2003-05-28 | 2004-12-02 | Gross John N. | Method of correlating advertising and recommender systems |
US7783512B2 (en) * | 2003-05-28 | 2010-08-24 | Gross John N | Method of evaluating learning rate of recommender systems |
US8433622B2 (en) | 2003-05-28 | 2013-04-30 | Media Queue, Llc | Method of controlling electronic commerce queue |
US8612311B2 (en) * | 2004-05-28 | 2013-12-17 | Media Queue, Llc | Hybrid distribution method for playable media |
US7685028B2 (en) * | 2003-05-28 | 2010-03-23 | Gross John N | Method of testing inventory management/shipping systems |
US8630960B2 (en) | 2003-05-28 | 2014-01-14 | John Nicholas Gross | Method of testing online recommender system |
US20060212367A1 (en) * | 2003-05-28 | 2006-09-21 | Gross John N | Method of selecting and distributing items to consumers of electronic media |
US8103540B2 (en) * | 2003-06-05 | 2012-01-24 | Hayley Logistics Llc | System and method for influencing recommender system |
US7685117B2 (en) * | 2003-06-05 | 2010-03-23 | Hayley Logistics Llc | Method for implementing search engine |
US7885849B2 (en) | 2003-06-05 | 2011-02-08 | Hayley Logistics Llc | System and method for predicting demand for items |
US7890363B2 (en) | 2003-06-05 | 2011-02-15 | Hayley Logistics Llc | System and method of identifying trendsetters |
US8140388B2 (en) * | 2003-06-05 | 2012-03-20 | Hayley Logistics Llc | Method for implementing online advertising |
US7689432B2 (en) | 2003-06-06 | 2010-03-30 | Hayley Logistics Llc | System and method for influencing recommender system & advertising based on programmed policies |
US8738541B2 (en) | 2003-06-25 | 2014-05-27 | Media Queue, Llc | Method of processing rental requests and returns |
EP2158763A1 (en) | 2007-06-26 | 2010-03-03 | NDS Limited | Presenting content |
KR100913964B1 (en) * | 2007-09-17 | 2009-08-25 | 주식회사 알티캐스트 | Method for controlling agent-based personal video recording, system and pvr box therefor |
US20130080907A1 (en) * | 2011-09-23 | 2013-03-28 | Richard Skelton | Method and system for a personalized content play list |
Family Cites Families (11)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
JPS6198476A (en) | 1984-10-19 | 1986-05-16 | Casio Comput Co Ltd | Card terminal and its certifying system |
DE3642851A1 (en) | 1986-12-16 | 1988-06-30 | Bbc Brown Boveri & Cie | ERROR-TOLERANT COMPUTING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING, LOCALIZING AND ELIMINATING DEFECTIVE UNITS IN SUCH A SYSTEM |
US5157455A (en) | 1990-08-07 | 1992-10-20 | Macri James N | Apparatus for the calibration and quality control of a spectrophotometer |
US5398315A (en) | 1992-12-30 | 1995-03-14 | North American Philips Corporation | Multi-processor video display apparatus |
US5410344A (en) * | 1993-09-22 | 1995-04-25 | Arrowsmith Technologies, Inc. | Apparatus and method of selecting video programs based on viewers' preferences |
JP3360705B2 (en) * | 1994-12-21 | 2002-12-24 | ソニー株式会社 | Broadcast receiving device and broadcast receiving method |
DE19518930A1 (en) | 1995-05-23 | 1996-11-28 | Siemens Ag | Connection control method for interactive services |
US5758259A (en) * | 1995-08-31 | 1998-05-26 | Microsoft Corporation | Automated selective programming guide |
WO1998037696A1 (en) * | 1997-02-21 | 1998-08-27 | Herz Frederick S M | Broadcast data distribution system with asymmetric uplink/downlink bandwidths |
US8713623B2 (en) * | 2001-09-20 | 2014-04-29 | Time Warner Cable Enterprises, LLC | Technique for effectively providing program material in a cable television system |
US7130866B2 (en) * | 2002-07-30 | 2006-10-31 | Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. | Controlling the growth of a feature frequency profile by deleting selected frequency counts of features of events |
-
2000
- 2000-02-08 US US09/500,306 patent/US6766525B1/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
-
2001
- 2001-01-15 WO PCT/EP2001/000463 patent/WO2001060063A2/en active Application Filing
- 2001-01-15 JP JP2001557783A patent/JP2003522499A/en active Pending
- 2001-01-15 EP EP01911491A patent/EP1186168A2/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2001-01-15 KR KR1020017012813A patent/KR20010114240A/en not_active Application Discontinuation
-
2004
- 2004-06-14 US US10/867,175 patent/US20040261107A1/en not_active Abandoned
Cited By (9)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20040024777A1 (en) * | 2002-07-30 | 2004-02-05 | Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. | Controlling the growth of a features frequency profile |
US7130866B2 (en) * | 2002-07-30 | 2006-10-31 | Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. | Controlling the growth of a feature frequency profile by deleting selected frequency counts of features of events |
US20150319181A1 (en) * | 2014-04-30 | 2015-11-05 | Twitter, Inc. | Application Graph Builder |
US9825987B2 (en) * | 2014-04-30 | 2017-11-21 | Twitter, Inc. | Application graph builder |
US9866586B2 (en) | 2014-04-30 | 2018-01-09 | Twitter, Inc. | Facilitating cross-platform content access |
US10547635B2 (en) | 2014-04-30 | 2020-01-28 | Twitter, Inc. | Facilitating cross-platform content access |
US11005883B2 (en) | 2014-04-30 | 2021-05-11 | Twitter, Inc. | Application graph builder |
US11218505B2 (en) | 2014-04-30 | 2022-01-04 | Twitter, Inc. | Facilitating cross-platform content access |
CN109963174A (en) * | 2019-01-28 | 2019-07-02 | 北京奇艺世纪科技有限公司 | Flow index of correlation predictor method, device and computer readable storage medium |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
WO2001060063A2 (en) | 2001-08-16 |
WO2001060063A3 (en) | 2001-12-20 |
JP2003522499A (en) | 2003-07-22 |
KR20010114240A (en) | 2001-12-31 |
US6766525B1 (en) | 2004-07-20 |
EP1186168A2 (en) | 2002-03-13 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US6766525B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for evaluating television program recommenders | |
KR100864186B1 (en) | Method for recommending television programs and a system for obtaining a recommendation for a television program | |
US7581237B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for generating television program recommendations based on prior queries | |
US20020174428A1 (en) | Method and apparatus for generating recommendations for a plurality of users | |
US6727914B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for recommending television programming using decision trees | |
US7721310B2 (en) | Method and apparatus for selective updating of a user profile | |
US8751957B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for obtaining auditory and gestural feedback in a recommendation system | |
US7007294B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for automatic generation of query search terms for a program recommender | |
US7441260B1 (en) | Television program recommender with automatic identification of changing viewer preferences | |
US20020075320A1 (en) | Method and apparatus for generating recommendations based on consistency of selection | |
US20030182249A1 (en) | Method and apparatus for recommending an item of interest using a radial basis function to fuse a plurality of recommendation scores | |
US20030233655A1 (en) | Method and apparatus for an adaptive stereotypical profile for recommending items representing a user's interests | |
EP1374582A1 (en) | Method and apparatus for automatically selecting an alternate item based on user behavior | |
WO2002043391A1 (en) | Method and apparatus for generating recommendations based on current mood of user | |
KR20030007801A (en) | Methods and apparatus for generating recommendation scores | |
US20030237094A1 (en) | Method to compare various initial cluster sets to determine the best initial set for clustering a set of TV shows |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION |