John Keane

Jonathan Carlton, Andy Brown, Caroline Jay et al.

Media is evolving from traditional linear narratives to personalised experiences, where control over information (or how it is presented) is given to individual audience members. Measuring and understanding audience engagement with this media is important in at least two ways: (1) a post-hoc understanding of how engaged audiences are with the content will help production teams learn from experience and improve future productions; (2), this type of media has potential for real-time measures of engagement to be used to enhance the user experience by adapting content on-the-fly. Engagement is typically measured by asking samples of users to self-report, which is time consuming and expensive. In some domains, however, interaction data have been used to infer engagement. Fortuitously, the nature of interactive media facilitates a much richer set of interaction data than traditional media; our research aims to understand if these data can be used to infer audience engagement. In this paper, we report a study using data captured from audience interactions with an interactive TV show to model and predict engagement. We find that temporal metrics, including overall time spent on the experience and the interval between events, are predictive of engagement. The results demonstrate that interaction data can be used to infer users' engagement during and after an experience, and the proposed techniques are relevant to better understand audience preference and responses.

Cameron Shand, Richard Allmendinger, Julia Handl et al.

Comprehensive benchmarking of clustering algorithms is rendered difficult by two key factors: (i)~the elusiveness of a unique mathematical definition of this unsupervised learning approach and (ii)~dependencies between the generating models or clustering criteria adopted by some clustering algorithms and indices for internal cluster validation. Consequently, there is no consensus regarding the best practice for rigorous benchmarking, and whether this is possible at all outside the context of a given application. Here, we argue that synthetic datasets must continue to play an important role in the evaluation of clustering algorithms, but that this necessitates constructing benchmarks that appropriately cover the diverse set of properties that impact clustering algorithm performance. Through our framework, HAWKS, we demonstrate the important role evolutionary algorithms play to support flexible generation of such benchmarks, allowing simple modification and extension. We illustrate two possible uses of our framework: (i)~the evolution of benchmark data consistent with a set of hand-derived properties and (ii)~the generation of datasets that tease out performance differences between a given pair of algorithms. Our work has implications for the design of clustering benchmarks that sufficiently challenge a broad range of algorithms, and for furthering insight into the strengths and weaknesses of specific approaches.