Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05
  • br Overall architecture of the proposed recommender system

    2020-07-30


    Overall architecture of the proposed recommender system In this section we describe the overall architecture of the proposed recommender system. Although dozens of recommender systems in software engineering have been built, no reference architecture has emerged to-date (Robillard et al., 2014). The variety of recommender systems in software engineering architectures is likely a consequence of the fact that most tools of this type work with a TMC647055 Choline salt mg source of data, and are therefore engineered to closely integrate with that data source (Robillard et al., 2014). In our proposal, the recommender system contains three processing components as illustrated in Fig. 1: the extraction and unification component, the user profile management component, and the recommendation component. First, the heterogeneous COTS components descriptions provided by the COTS publishers are processed by the extraction and unification component to generate a common representation. This component makes possible the creation and the management of the semantic descriptions of COTS components, which represent knowledge about items. Third, the recommendation component ranks and displays COTS components based on the functional requirements expressed in the user query and the preferences stored in his/her profile. To better exploit the COTS components descriptions repository, the recommendation component makes use of, on the one hand, a linguistic ontology namely WordNet (Fellbaum, 1998, Fellbaum, 2005), which is a large lexical database of English grouping terms into sets of cognitive synonyms linked through semantic relations, and on the other hand, a domain ontology namely Open Directory Project (ODP), which is known to be the largest and most comprehensive Web topic ontology. Knowledge about how the items match the user’s needs is encapsulated in this component.
    COTS components representation The proposed recommender system is first based on the use of ontology in order to represent different COTS components descriptions in a unified and formal manner and therefore to allow rigorous reasoning process on COTS components knowledge whatever the format and the terminology used are. We describe in this section the ONTOlogy for COTS components (ONTOCOTS), that we built to provide common and shared structure, terminology and semantics for COTS components representation. The ontology is built using the Archonte method (Bachimont et al., 2002). This latter involves three steps. It starts by a semantic normalization of the terms introduced in the ontology, followed by a formalization of the meaning of knowledge primitives obtained and ends with an operationalization using knowledge representation languages. In the second part of this section, we present how data is actually collected from COTS publishers sites and represented as ONTOCOTS instances.
    User knowledge representation Various representation approaches of user interests and preferences are proposed. In this work, we advocate a multidimensional semantic approach based on Bouzghoub et al. meta-model (Bouzeghoub and Kostadinov, 2005), depicted in Fig. 6, to model the user profile. The instantiation of this meta-model for COTS components search personalization has resulted in the user model we presented in Yanes et al. (2015). We first briefly introduce the user model and then we present how Aminoacyl-tRNA is constructed and updated.