Bart P. Knijnenburg

h-index34
2papers
4,797citations

2 Papers

2.7CLJun 8, 2025
Manifesto from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 24352 -- Conversational Agents: A Framework for Evaluation (CAFE)

Christine Bauer, Li Chen, Nicola Ferro et al.

During the workshop, we deeply discussed what CONversational Information ACcess (CONIAC) is and its unique features, proposing a world model abstracting it, and defined the Conversational Agents Framework for Evaluation (CAFE) for the evaluation of CONIAC systems, consisting of six major components: 1) goals of the system's stakeholders, 2) user tasks to be studied in the evaluation, 3) aspects of the users carrying out the tasks, 4) evaluation criteria to be considered, 5) evaluation methodology to be applied, and 6) measures for the quantitative criteria chosen.

13.8IROct 3, 2013
Differential Data Analysis for Recommender Systems

Richard Chow, Hongxia Jin, Bart Knijnenburg et al.

We present techniques to characterize which data is important to a recommender system and which is not. Important data is data that contributes most to the accuracy of the recommendation algorithm, while less important data contributes less to the accuracy or even decreases it. Characterizing the importance of data has two potential direct benefits: (1) increased privacy and (2) reduced data management costs, including storage. For privacy, we enable increased recommendation accuracy for comparable privacy levels using existing data obfuscation techniques. For storage, our results indicate that we can achieve large reductions in recommendation data and yet maintain recommendation accuracy. Our main technique is called differential data analysis. The name is inspired by other sorts of differential analysis, such as differential power analysis and differential cryptanalysis, where insight comes through analysis of slightly differing inputs. In differential data analysis we chunk the data and compare results in the presence or absence of each chunk. We present results applying differential data analysis to two datasets and three different kinds of attributes. The first attribute is called user hardship. This is a novel attribute, particularly relevant to location datasets, that indicates how burdensome a data point was to achieve. The second and third attributes are more standard: timestamp and user rating. For user rating, we confirm previous work concerning the increased importance to the recommender of data corresponding to high and low user ratings.