skip to main content
10.1145/2856767.2856783acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

AppGrouper: Knowledge-based Interactive Clustering Tool for App Search Results

Published:07 March 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

A relatively new feature in Google Play Store presents mobile app search results grouped by topic, helping users to quickly navigate and explore. The underlying Search Results Clustering (SRC) system faces several challenges, including grouping search results in topical coherent clusters as well as finding the appropriate level of granularity for clustering. We present AppGrouper, an alternative approach to algorithmic-only solutions, incorporating human input in a knowledge-graph-based clustering process. AppGrouper provides an interactive interface that lets domain experts steer the clustering process in early, mid, and late stages. We deployed and evaluated AppGrouper with internal experts. We found that AppGroup improved quality of algorithm-generated app clusters on 56 out of 82 search queries. We also found that the internal experts made more changes in early and mid stages for lower-quality algorithmic results, focusing more on narrow queries. Our result suggests, in some contexts, machine learning systems can greatly benefit from steering from human experts, creating a symbiotic working relationship.

References

  1. Saleema Amershi, Bongshin Lee, Ashish Kapoor, Ratul Mahajan, and Blaine Christian. 2011. CueT: Human-guided Fast and Accurate Network Alarm Triage. In CHI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Hrishikesh Aradhye, George Toderici, and Jay Yagnik. 2009. Video2Text: Learning to Annotate Video Content. In IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Pranjal Awasthi, Maria-Florina Balcan, and Konstantin Voevodski. 2014. Local algorithms for interactive clustering. In ICML.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Sugato Basu, Arindam Banerjee, and Raymond J. Mooney. 2004. Active Semi-Supervision for Pairwise Constrained Clustering. In Proceedings of the 2004 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (SDM-04).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Sumit Basu, Danyel Fisher, Steven M. Drucker, and Hao Lu. 2010. Assisting Users with Clustering Tasks by Combining Metric Learning and Classification.. In AAAI. AAAI Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Claudio Carpineto, Stanislaw Osiski, Giovanni Romano, and Dawid Weiss. 2009. A survey of Web clustering engines. Comput. Surveys 41 (2009). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Claudio Carpineto and Giovanni Romano. 2010. Optimal Meta Search Results Clustering. In SIGIR. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Shuo Chang, Peng Dai, Jilin Chen, and Ed H. Chi. 2015. Got Many Labels?: Deriving Topic Labels from Multiple Sources for Social Media Posts using Crowdsourcing and Ensemble Learning. (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Jason Chuang, Sonal Gupta, Christopher D. Manning, and Jeffrey Heer. 2013. Topic Model Diagnostics: Assessing Domain Relevance via Topical Alignment. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Marie desJardins, James MacGlashan, and Julia Ferraioli. 2007. Interactive Visual Clustering. In IUI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Jerry Alan Fails and Dan R. Olsen, Jr. Interactive Machine Learning. In IUI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Paolo Ferragina and Antonio Gulli. 2005. A Personalized Search Engine Based on Web-snippet Hierarchical Clustering. In Special Interest Tracks and Posters of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. James Fogarty, Desney Tan, Ashish Kapoor, and Simon Winder. 2008. CueFlik: Interactive Concept Learning in Image Search. In CHI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Todd Kulesza, Margaret Burnett, Weng-Keen Wong, and Simone Stumpf. 2015. Principles of Explanatory Debugging to Personalize Interactive Machine Learning. In IUI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Stanislaw Osinski and Dawid Weiss. 2005. A Concept-Driven Algorithm for Clustering Search Results. IEEE Intelligent Systems 20, 3 (May 2005), 48--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Peter Pirolli, Patricia Schank, Marti Hearst, and Christine Diehl. 1996. Scatter/Gather Browsing Communicates the Topic Structure of a Very Large Text Collection. In CHI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Ugo Scaiella, Paolo Ferragina, Andrea Marino, and Massimiliano Ciaramita. 2012. Topical clustering of search results. In WSDM. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Jesse Vig, Shilad Sen, and John Riedl. 2011. Navigating the Tag Genome. In IUI. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Jason Weston, Samy Bengio, and Nicolas Usunier. 2011. WSABIE: scaling up to large vocabulary image annotation. (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. AppGrouper: Knowledge-based Interactive Clustering Tool for App Search Results

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      IUI '16: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces
      March 2016
      446 pages
      ISBN:9781450341370
      DOI:10.1145/2856767

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 March 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      IUI '16 Paper Acceptance Rate49of194submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate746of2,811submissions,27%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader