Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Estimating feature ratings through an effective review selection approach

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Knowledge and Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Most participatory web sites collect overall ratings (e.g., five stars) of products from their customers, reflecting the overall assessment of the products. However, it is more useful to present ratings of product features (such as price, battery, screen, and lens of digital cameras) to help customers make effective purchase decisions. Unfortunately, only a very few web sites have collected feature ratings. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to accurately estimate feature ratings of products. This approach selects user reviews that extensively discuss specific features of the products (called specialized reviews), using information distance of reviews on the features. Experiments on both annotated and real data show that overall ratings of the specialized reviews can be used to represent their feature ratings. The average of these overall ratings can be used by recommender systems to provide feature-specific recommendations that can better help users make purchasing decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zhuang L, Jing F, Zhu X (2006) Movie review mining and summarization. In: ACM 17th conference on information and knowledge management (CIKM), pp 43–50

  2. Schafer JB, Konstan J, Riedi J (1999) Recommender systems in e-commerce. In: 1st ACM conference on electronic commerce (EC), pp 158–166

  3. Pang B, Lee L, Vaithyanathan S (2002) Thumbs up? sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In: Conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 79–86

  4. Hu M, Liu B (2004) Mining and summarizing customer reviews. In: 10th ACM international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (KDD), pp 168–177

  5. Talwar A, Jurca R, Faltings B (2007) Understanding user behavior in online feedback reporting. In: 8th ACM conference on electronic commerce (EC), pp 134–142

  6. Long C, Zhang J, Huang M, Zhu X, Li M, Ma B (2009) Specialized review selection for feature rating estimation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on web intelligence (WI)

  7. Hatzivassiloglou V, McKeown KR (1997) Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives. In: Annual meeting of the association of computational linguistics (ACL), pp 174–181

  8. Kamps J, Marx M (2002) Words with attitude. In: The first international conference on global WordNet, pp 174–181

  9. Popescu AM, Etzioni O (2005) Extracting product features and opinions from reviews. In: Conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 339–346

  10. Dave K, Lawrence S, Pennock DM (2005) Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews. In: International world wide web conference (WWW), pp 519–528

  11. Mullen T, Collier N (2004) Sentiment analysis using support vector machines with diverse information sources. In: Conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 412–418

  12. Pang B, Lee L (2004) A sentimental education: Sentiment analysis using subjectivity summarization based on minimum cuts. In: Annual meeting of the association of computational linguistics (ACL), pp 271–278

  13. Pang B, Lee L (2005) Seeing stars: Exploiting class relationships for sentiment categorization with respect to rating scales. In: Annual meeting of the association of computational linguistics (ACL), pp 115–124

  14. Lu Y, Zhai C, Sundaresan N (2009) Movie review mining and summarization. In: International world wide web conference (WWW), pp 131–140

  15. Wang H, Lu Y, Zhai C (2010) Latent aspect rating analysis on review text data: a rating regression approach. In: ACM international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (KDD), pp 783–792

  16. Kim SM, Pantel P, Chklovski T, Pennacchiotti M (2006) Automatically assessing review helpfulness. In: Conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 423–430

  17. Liu Y, Huang X, An A, Yu X (2008) Modeling and predicting the helpfulness of online reviews. In: IEEE international conference on data mining (ICDM), pp 443–452

  18. Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil C, Kossinets G, Kleinberg J (2009) How opinions are received by online communities: A case study on amazon.com helpfulness votes. In: International world wide web conference (WWW), pp 141–150

  19. Liu J, Cao Y, Lin CY, Huang Y, Zhou M (2006) Low-quality product review detection in opinion summarization. In: Conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), pp 423–430

  20. Li F, Tang Y, Huang M, Zhu X (2004) Answering opinion questions with random walks on graphs. In: Annual meeting of the association of computational linguistics (ACL), pp 737–745

  21. Li M, Vitányi P (1997) An introduction to Kolmogorov complexity and its applications, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Tan P, Kumar V, Srivastava J (2002) Selecting the right interestingness measure for association patterns. In: The 8th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp 32–44

  23. Bennett C, Gacs P, Li M, Vitányi P, Zurek W (1998) Information distance. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 44(4): 1407–1423

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Li M, Badger J, Chen X, Kwong S, Kearney P, Zhang H (2001) An information-based sequence distance and its application to whole mitochondrial genome phylogeny. Bioinformatics 17(2): 149–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Li M, Chen X, Li X, Ma B, Vitányi P (2004) The similarity metric. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 50(12): 3250–3264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bennett C, Li M, Ma B (2003) Chain letters and evolutionary histories. Sci Am 288(6): 76–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhang X, Hao Y, Zhu X, Li M (2007) Information distance from a question to an answer. In: The 13th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining

  28. Long C, Zhu X, Li M, Ma B (2008) Information shared by many objects. In: ACM 17th conference on information and knowledge management (CIKM)

  29. Cilibrasi RL, Vitányi PM (2007) The Google similarity distance. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 19(3): 370–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Marneffe MC, MacCartney B, Manning CD (2006) Generating typed dependency parses from phrase structure parses. In: The fifth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC)

  31. Lewis J, Ossowski S, Hicks J, Errami M, Garner HR (2006) Text similarity: an alternative way to search Medline. Bioinformatics 22(18): 2298–2304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Jia Y, Zhang J, Huan J (2011) An efficient graph-mining method for complicated and noisy data with real-world applications. Knowl Inf Syst (KAIS) 28(2): 423–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Eirinaki M, Vazirgiannis M (2003) Web mining for web personalization. ACM Trans Internet Technol (TOIT) 3(1): 1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Saleh B, Masseglia F (2011) Discovering frequent behaviors: time is an essential element of the context. Knowl Inf Syst (KAIS) 28(2): 311–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Becchetti L, Colesanti UM, Marchetti-Spaccamela A, Vitaletti A (2011) Recommending items in pervasive scenarios: models and experimental analysis. Knowl Inf Syst (KAIS) 28(3): 555–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Yahoo! Labs, Beijing, China

    Chong Long

  2. School of Computer Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Jie Zhang

  3. State Key Laboratory of Intelligent Technology and Systems, Department of Computer Science and Technology, Tsinghua National Laboratory for Information Science and Technology, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Minlie Huang & Xiaoyan Zhu

  4. School of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada

    Ming Li & Bin Ma

Authors
  1. Chong Long
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jie Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Minlie Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xiaoyan Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ming Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bin Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiaoyan Zhu.

Additional information

This work was done when C. Long was a Ph.D. student in Tsinghua University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Long, C., Zhang, J., Huang, M. et al. Estimating feature ratings through an effective review selection approach. Knowl Inf Syst 38, 419–446 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-012-0495-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-012-0495-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation