KDD Reviews 周天烁 2018年5月9日.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Critical Reading Strategies: Overview of Research Process
Advertisements

Customer Success is Our Mission MILCOM 2008 Reviewer Guidelines Rev B 8 July 2008.
Dr Ronni Michelle Greenwood Autumn  Introduction  Method  Results  Discussion.
Dong Liu Xian-Sheng Hua Linjun Yang Meng Weng Hong-Jian Zhang.
2008 © ChengXiang Zhai Dragon Star Lecture at Beijing University, June 21-30, Introduction to IR Research ChengXiang Zhai Department of Computer.
I.B. Psych Exam Review.
MANISHA VERMA, VASUDEVA VARMA PATENT SEARCH USING IPC CLASSIFICATION VECTORS.
Queensland University of Technology An Ontology-based Mining Approach for User Search Intent Discovery Yan Shen, Yuefeng Li, Yue Xu, Renato Iannella, Abdulmohsen.
Compare&Contrast: Using the Web to Discover Comparable Cases for News Stories Presenter: Aravind Krishna Kalavagattu.
Authors: Bhavana Bharat Dalvi, Meghana Kshirsagar, S. Sudarshan Presented By: Aruna Keyword Search on External Memory Data Graphs.
READING A PAPER. Basic Parts of a Research Paper 1. Abstract 2. Introduction to Technology (background) 3. Tools & techniques/Methods used in current.
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
1 Formal Models for Expert Finding on DBLP Bibliography Data Presented by: Hongbo Deng Co-worked with: Irwin King and Michael R. Lyu Department of Computer.
Critical Issues of XML Schema & RDF & Suggested Solutions Peter P. Chen Bootstrap Institute & Louisiana State University
Topical Crawlers for Building Digital Library Collections Presenter: Qiaozhu Mei.
Keyword Searching and Browsing in Databases using BANKS Seoyoung Ahn Mar 3, 2005 The University of Texas at Arlington.
Discovering Meta-Paths in Large Heterogeneous Information Network
Literature Search – How to Make Hard Work Easier? Prof. Haiying Huang Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering University.
MedEdPORTAL Reviewer Tutorial Contact MedEdPORTAL
Templated Search over Relational Databases Date: 2015/01/15 Author: Anastasios Zouzias, Michail Vlachos, Vagelis Hristidis Source: ACM CIKM’14 Advisor:
We toiled, we submitted, … we conq got rejected Discussion on close rejects Saptarshi Ghosh CNeRG Retreat.
The Effect of on By:. Purpose The purpose of this project was to.
Digital Libraries1 David Rashty. Digital Libraries2 “A library is an arsenal of liberty” Anonymous.
Two Paradigms for Official Statistics Production Boris Lorenc, Jakob Engdahl and Klas Blomqvist Statistics Sweden.
Date: 2012/08/21 Source: Zhong Zeng, Zhifeng Bao, Tok Wang Ling, Mong Li Lee (KEYS’12) Speaker: Er-Gang Liu Advisor: Dr. Jia-ling Koh 1.
Principals of Research Writing. What is Research Writing? Process of communicating your research  Before the fact  Research proposal  After the fact.
1. Literature Review Hart (1998) defined the literature review as “the use of ideas in the literature to justify the particular approach to the topic,
USING COMMAND TERMS – PRACTICE 1 ATKINSON, D THE USE OF PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION AND RESPONDENT DIARIES IN A STUDY OF ORDINARY LIVING.
What’s Included in a Review Irving H. Zucker, Ph.D. University of Nebraska Medical Center A Primer for Potential Reviewers Experimental Biology 2014 San.
ClusCite:Effective Citation Recommendation by Information Network-Based Clustering Date: 2014/10/16 Author: Xiang Ren, Jialu Liu,Xiao Yu, Urvashi Khandelwal,
Understanding and Critically Appraising the Literature Review
Event Detection Aliaksei Antonau 1 5. Juli
Significance of Findings and Discussion
Queensland University of Technology
Writing Scientific Research Paper
Discussion of the paper: The peer performance ratios of hedge funds
WRITING A SUCCESSFUL RESEARCH PAPER
Introduction to Databases (2)
Review of Related Literature
REPORT WRITING The Principle Differences Between Report & Essay Writing Rhodri Davies.
Informatics in secondary and elementary schools in Serbia
Research Methods Dr. X.
Evaluating Adaptive Authoring of AH
Introduction to IR Research
The peer review process
Outline Goals: Searching scientific journal articles
Personalized Social Image Recommendation
MASTER’S RESEARCH GUIDELINES
Beijing University of Technology, China, September 28, 2006
Unit 4 Introducing the Study.
Integrating Meta-Path Selection With User-Guided Object Clustering in Heterogeneous Information Networks Yizhou Sun†, Brandon Norick†, Jiawei Han†, Xifeng.
Research proposal MGT-602.
Writing the Document Based Question (DBQ) Essay
Extended Essay General Rubric.
Student Name, Category, Name of School, and Teacher Name
READING A PAPER.
AS LEVEL Paper One – Section A / B
Navi 下一步工作的设想 郑 亮 6.6.
Discriminative Frequent Pattern Analysis for Effective Classification
[jws13] Evaluation of instance matching tools: The experience of OAEI
A LEVEL Paper Three– Section A
How to Read a Paper (Practice: CCS’14)
Introduction to Research Methodology
Research Methodology BE-5305
Zimbabwe 2008 Critical Thinking.
Introduction to Search Engines
COMP564 paper review <title & authors of the paper>
Heterogeneous Graph Attention Network
Introduction Dataset search
Instructions One Column Designed Dear author(s),
Presentation transcript:

KDD Reviews 周天烁 2018年5月9日

Outline Manuscript & Reviews Manuscript Reviews

Reviews Review 1 Review 2 Review 3 Review 4 Novelty : 3: (Incremental) 2: (Standard) 4: (Some novelty) Quality : 3: (Fair) 4: (Good) 2: (Weak) Presentation : 1: (No) 2: (Yes) Overall evaluation : -2: (I am not championing but if there is a champion then I am fine accepting) -4: (I believe this should be rejected)

Motivation Schema-simple Graph meta-path

Schema-rich Graph Motivation

Automatically select Meta-Path in relavance search AutoMP Automatically select Meta-Path in relavance search

Strengths Interesting problem of using meta-paths selection for relevance search; This paper propose an interesting problem formulation. This paper distinguished the schema-rich and schema-simple HIN, and demonstrate different performance comparison on each case. The topic of automated meta-path selection is interesting and significant to HIN community. The introduction clearly explains the problem of user-guided relevance search with concrete examples. The paper is well motivated and provides good background of the problem.

The motivation is not convincing The motivation is not well justified, why study such a problem? The authors said it has important applications in web search and product recommendation, but the situation of 'user-guided' search in HIN seems rarely happen in web search or product recommendation. And the examples illustrated in Fig. 2 are artificial. One attempts to know the collaborators of Jiawei Han could simply search name in the DBLP and view the column of 'refine by co-author', while one want to know outstanding researcher like Jiawei Han in related fields would use the keyword 'data mining' to search the DBLP database. It is a little bit counterintuitive to image a query processing where the user would give some sample results to guide his/her search.

AutoMP Meta-Path Selection Weight Learning Significance of Meta-Path heuristic forest Weight Learning generation of high-quality negative examples SVM

Significance of Meta-Path example entities representative entities Scoreing function

Greedy Tree query example entities representative entities

Generate negative examples + ? P1 P2 ? query ? … + ? ? Pn ?

Soft margin SVM

Strengths A possible, reasonable solution for the problem. This paper proposes a new approach to users-guided relevance search called AutoMP that can automatically identify a set of significant meta-paths that can best characterize the user's intent indicated by the example entities. AutoMP can generate high-quality negative examples based on the identified meta-paths. The model is capable of discovering and exploiting the semantics of relevance indicated by example entities, and well suits the relevance search task.

Weaknesses Technical merit of the proposed meta-path selection (especially meta- path forests) is not clear; Missing important references and related work is out of date; Some model choices are not well justified. Theoretical contributions are minimal. Some components in the proposed method are not explained clearly. How to build meta-path forest should be explained more clearly.

Experiment Dataset Baseline DBLP DBpedia YAGO UGSS[12’KDD] Relsim [16’SIAM] Relsim+ AutoMP- DMP[15’WWW]

Weaknesses Weak experiments. The number of datasets is limited, and the results are not stable. Experiments are not sound. The experiments are not convincing. Some related baselines are not included. Only one schema-rich network is used. There is no case study to clearly illustrate the work.

Suggestions / Conclusion Clarify the concept novelty. The authors may need to address more in depth on the problems stated above for the AutoMP model. It seems that the performances of AutoMP rely heavily on high-quality negative samples. Meanwhile, the meta-path forest doesn't work well. Improve experiments. Provide more convincing use cases of the proposed problem setting. Do experiments on more datasets (e.g., facebook). It’s strongly recommend that the authors expand the experimental evaluations. You should do more experiments on schema-rich HINs to validate the validity of AutoMP.

THANKS