Building User Groups Based on a Structural Representation of User Search Sessions

Identifying user groups is an important task in order to personalise search results. In Digital Libraries, visited resources and the sequential search patterns are often used to measure user similarity. Whereas visited resources help to understand what users want, they do not reveal how users prefer to search. In contrast, sequential patterns allow to decode the way in which users search, but they are very strict and do not allow changes in the order of the search. A third alternative and compromise could be the analysis of the structure of a search session. In this paper, we aim to obtain some insights into the potential of analysing search sessions on a structural basis. Therefore, we will investigate a structural representation of search sessions based on tree graphs. We will present a novel method to merge multiple session trees into a combined tree. Based on combined tree taken from similar sessions, we will build archetypical trees for different user groups.

[1]  Monica M. C. Schraefel,et al.  A longitudinal study of exploratory and keyword search , 2008, JCDL '08.

[2]  Jens Fangerau Interactive Similarity Analysis for 3D+t Cell Trajectory Data , 2015 .

[3]  Päivi Majaranta,et al.  Eye-Tracking Reveals the Personal Styles for Search Result Evaluation , 2005, INTERACT.

[4]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Guest editors’ introduction to the special issue on knowledge maps and information retrieval (KMIR) , 2016, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[5]  Ryen W. White,et al.  Large-scale analysis of individual and task differences in search result page examination strategies , 2012, WSDM '12.

[6]  Jaideep Srivastava,et al.  Web usage mining: discovery and applications of usage patterns from Web data , 2000, SKDD.

[7]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Learning user interaction models for predicting web search result preferences , 2006, SIGIR.

[8]  Chirag Shah,et al.  User Activity Patterns During Information Search , 2015, ACM Trans. Inf. Syst..

[9]  Barbara M. Wildemuth,et al.  The effects of domain knowledge on search tactic formulation , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[10]  Chirag Shah,et al.  Extracting Information Seeking Intentions for Web Search Sessions , 2016, SIGIR.

[11]  Jaideep Srivastava,et al.  Automatic personalization based on Web usage mining , 2000, CACM.

[12]  Hinrich Schütze,et al.  Introduction to information retrieval , 2008 .

[13]  Matthias Hagen,et al.  How Writers Search: Analyzing the Search and Writing Logs of Non-fictional Essays , 2016, CHIIR.

[14]  Ryen W. White,et al.  WWW 2007 / Track: Browsers and User Interfaces Session: Personalization Investigating Behavioral Variability in Web Search , 2022 .

[15]  Philipp Mayr,et al.  Investigating exploratory search activities based on the stratagem level in digital libraries , 2017, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[16]  Philipp Mayr,et al.  Digital Library Research in Action: Supporting Information Retrieval in Sowiport , 2015, D Lib Mag..

[17]  MAGDALINI EIRINAKI,et al.  Web mining for web personalization , 2003, TOIT.

[18]  Matthew Banta,et al.  What do exploratory searchers look at in a faceted search interface? , 2009, JCDL '09.

[19]  David Ellis,et al.  A Behavioural Approach to Information Retrieval System Design , 1989, J. Documentation.

[20]  Eve E. Hoggan,et al.  Information-seeking behaviors of computer scientists: Challenges for electronic literature search tools , 2013, ASIST.