Dit onderwerp is gemarkeerd als "slapend"—het laatste bericht is van meer dan 90 dagen geleden. Je kan het activeren door een een bericht toe te voegen.
1timspalding
Here's the announcement:
http://www.librarything.com/blog/2008/05/librarything-recommendations.php
I recognize that members really do want a "no thanks!" link. It's on my list for tomorrow.
http://www.librarything.com/blog/2008/05/librarything-recommendations.php
I recognize that members really do want a "no thanks!" link. It's on my list for tomorrow.
2nperrin
I am loving the whole-library unsuggestions. Just a note for you on a bit of weirdness: my #38 unsuggestion was Gaudy Night by Dorothy L. Sayers, and the "why" listed a whole slew of books that I guess pop it up in the unsuggester. What's weird about it is that I also have two books by Sayers in the same series. Don't know if it's possible to weigh things like that in, but it seems a little odd.
3timspalding
Yeah, it only counts positive votes, not negative ones. (By the same token, your main recommendations don't exclude unsuggestions.)
Actually, it's a little more complicated. It *does* exclude anything in the main recommendations from the unsuggestions. But it doesn't exclude things that *would* have been recommended, but were removed because you actually have them.
You raise a good point. The calculations get hairy, though.
More generally, unsuggestions are fallible. They basically arise because a given book was statistically rare among the users who have your books. That can backfire. For example, people who have the omnibus of HP don't usually have all the single editions--which might then show up in their unsuggester. Weird, I know. Combination issues are another potential pitfall. Take it all with a grain of salt.
Actually, it's a little more complicated. It *does* exclude anything in the main recommendations from the unsuggestions. But it doesn't exclude things that *would* have been recommended, but were removed because you actually have them.
You raise a good point. The calculations get hairy, though.
More generally, unsuggestions are fallible. They basically arise because a given book was statistically rare among the users who have your books. That can backfire. For example, people who have the omnibus of HP don't usually have all the single editions--which might then show up in their unsuggester. Weird, I know. Combination issues are another potential pitfall. Take it all with a grain of salt.
4nperrin
Are you saying the unsuggester doesn't exclude books I actually have?
But yeah, the HP boxed set pops up as an unsuggestion for me, but that makes sense, because it's right—I don't want it. I'm not actually complaining because I think it's totally fine like this, but it's interesting—only freaks like Kant and Sophie Kinsella, but there's someone out there who is that freak, right, and we have evidence of that because (s)he the Critique of Pure Reason and The Devil Wears Prada.
I'm just glad you wield your freak-identification powers for good, not evil.
But yeah, the HP boxed set pops up as an unsuggestion for me, but that makes sense, because it's right—I don't want it. I'm not actually complaining because I think it's totally fine like this, but it's interesting—only freaks like Kant and Sophie Kinsella, but there's someone out there who is that freak, right, and we have evidence of that because (s)he the Critique of Pure Reason and The Devil Wears Prada.
I'm just glad you wield your freak-identification powers for good, not evil.
5timspalding
Good point. No, it does exclude things you have. Now even I'm confused.
6rsterling
My list of "unsuggested" books also includes some that I own/have in my library. They're also books that, if I didn't already have them, I'd be more likely to expect as suggestions than unsuggestions: they're books owned by a lot of people, I have other books related to them, and the people who share a lot of my books are likely to have them. For example: The Hamlet (I think this one shows up twice on the unsuggested list), Democracy in America, Even Cowgirls get the Blues, Second Treatise of Government, Metamorphoses.
7twomoredays
First, I love the new recommendations; I love Librarything and I love you too, Tim. Is there a Webby for best listening web developer?
I have long been addicted to playing around with my Amazon recommendations to find new books and finally it seems like I might have as much flexibility with LT recommendations. If collections finally come to fruition and I can remove/opt-out from recommendations, LT may finally become the one and only book browsing pastime.
Of course, the unsuggester seems to think I'm a godless, liberal heathen which I find pretty hilarious. (We'll see if over time it reflects my own reformation.)
Thanks for all the hard work!
I have long been addicted to playing around with my Amazon recommendations to find new books and finally it seems like I might have as much flexibility with LT recommendations. If collections finally come to fruition and I can remove/opt-out from recommendations, LT may finally become the one and only book browsing pastime.
Of course, the unsuggester seems to think I'm a godless, liberal heathen which I find pretty hilarious. (We'll see if over time it reflects my own reformation.)
Thanks for all the hard work!
8Scorbet
You can add another person who really likes the new recommendations.
However, my computer (as usual) has come up with an interesting error. It has decided not to show me the ranking of the books. Instead I just have bullet points. It's not major, and I can live without them.I'm using IE7 on WinXP Pro.
However, my computer (as usual) has come up with an interesting error. It has decided not to show me the ranking of the books. Instead I just have bullet points. It's not major, and I can live without them.I'm using IE7 on WinXP Pro.
9markbarnes
Can I just add my vote for a refinement that takes into consideration our star-rating. I do so for the following reasons:
(1) Most users won't rate a book they haven't read. Generally speaking read books should influences suggestions higher than "owned but not read" books.
(2) If we rate a book "5", that book should influence suggestions more than if we rate a book "3". That stands to reason. There will be thousands of people here who are adventurous readers, and try (and add to LT) lots of books on others' suggestions then find out then don't really like them. We rate them "3". These books shouldn't influence ratings for the better.
(3) If we rate a book "1", that book should negatively influence suggestions. That is, any recommendations from that book should be reduced in rank, and any unsuggestions from that book that are already recommended should be increased in rank.
I take Tim's point that most books are marked 4 or 5, but my first point still stands, and if my second and third points are rare events that only demonstrates their importance when they are used.
(1) Most users won't rate a book they haven't read. Generally speaking read books should influences suggestions higher than "owned but not read" books.
(2) If we rate a book "5", that book should influence suggestions more than if we rate a book "3". That stands to reason. There will be thousands of people here who are adventurous readers, and try (and add to LT) lots of books on others' suggestions then find out then don't really like them. We rate them "3". These books shouldn't influence ratings for the better.
(3) If we rate a book "1", that book should negatively influence suggestions. That is, any recommendations from that book should be reduced in rank, and any unsuggestions from that book that are already recommended should be increased in rank.
I take Tim's point that most books are marked 4 or 5, but my first point still stands, and if my second and third points are rare events that only demonstrates their importance when they are used.
10markbarnes
Incidentally, I forgot to ask: How are member recommendations ranked?
11librarybooks
I agree with mark's suggestion -- but I wonder if the ratings aren't already being weighted?
Also, is/could there be a way to filter OUT a given tag? For example, right now many of my recommendations (esp the top ones) are because of a number of highly-rated children's books in my library. I have those in there for a specific reason, but would really like to see recommendations NOT based on those... so if I could do, for example, an (everything but children's) tag, that's the recommendation list I want. But I don't want to go tag everything else with that :)
And thanks, tim! I love that you guys actually listen to the feedback and respond, no less!
Also, is/could there be a way to filter OUT a given tag? For example, right now many of my recommendations (esp the top ones) are because of a number of highly-rated children's books in my library. I have those in there for a specific reason, but would really like to see recommendations NOT based on those... so if I could do, for example, an (everything but children's) tag, that's the recommendation list I want. But I don't want to go tag everything else with that :)
And thanks, tim! I love that you guys actually listen to the feedback and respond, no less!
12reading_fox
Any chance of retunring the 'omit books by authors already owned' as was previously present!
Would love to see the ratings weighting introduced!
I seem to be getting a bias for strange and unrelated low copy works as recommendations - but maybe the "no thanks" option will sort this out for me!
Would love to see the ratings weighting introduced!
I seem to be getting a bias for strange and unrelated low copy works as recommendations - but maybe the "no thanks" option will sort this out for me!
13markbarnes
As recommendations are calculated "on-the-fly" when based on our own tags, why not allow recommendations based on any search. librarybooks could then key in tag:-children.
15kaelirenee
Dang it-because my TBR list wasn't long enough! :D
I think it's hillarious that, aside from a few random things like the HP boxed set and some things on fantasy lit, the unsuggester almost exclusivly returned Chick-lit and books written for the evangelical Christian set. How did it know? LOL
Thanks for adding such a great new discovery tool!
I think it's hillarious that, aside from a few random things like the HP boxed set and some things on fantasy lit, the unsuggester almost exclusivly returned Chick-lit and books written for the evangelical Christian set. How did it know? LOL
Thanks for adding such a great new discovery tool!
16rebeccanyc
Being able to look at recommendations based on your own tags is great.
Would it be possible to exclude one or more of our tags and get recommendations that aren't based on that one? In my case, I'm thinking of the "mystery" tag, because my mystery collection really overinfluences my recommendations.
Would it be possible to exclude one or more of our tags and get recommendations that aren't based on that one? In my case, I'm thinking of the "mystery" tag, because my mystery collection really overinfluences my recommendations.
17tortoise
Weirdly enough, I too have Gaudy Night high on my list of unsuggestions, despite owning it. The algorithm just doesn't like it, I guess...
18lenoreva
All of the top choices by the unsuggester were christian non-fiction for me - some of which I actually own. So I finally entered them into my library.
19Talbin
Like #18, most of my unsuggestions were also Christian non-fiction. Looking at the "why" it seems to be because I own a lot of fiction, everything from Moll Flanders to O Pioneers to Memoirs of a Geisha. Very interesting.
20Talbin
Like #18, a majority of my unsuggestions were also Christian non-fiction. Looking at the why, it seems be be because I own a lot of fiction - everything from Moll Flanders to O Pioneers! to Memoirs of a Geisha. Interesting.
21timspalding
It's almost spooky how spot on my unsuggestions list is!
Good to hear.
Can I just add my vote for a refinement that takes into consideration our star-rating.
I'll think about it, but for now I'm focused on keeping things as trim as possible. While I understand your arguments, the extra thinking involved bothers me.
Incidentally, I forgot to ask: How are member recommendations ranked?
Oh, recentness. When a book is recommended more than once, by the recenter recommendation.
librarybooks: Also, is/could there be a way to filter OUT a given tag
Yes, it could be done. I'm trying, however, to provide a limited set of tools. It seems to me if exclude-by-tag is useful, you can get much the same--and much more--from "focus by tag" as we have now.
I do understand that members want more, and I may cave. (I caved on focusing by tag rather than filtering exclusively, pushed by _Zoe_ among others and she was dead-right.) But I always need to keep in mind that features are like children. They need to be fed. They grow up in weird ways. I'd rather have fewer children than raise them poorly :)
Any chance of retunring the 'omit books by authors already owned' as was previously present!
Well, maybe you can get up a campaign, but the overall absence of this request is pretty interesting to me. I think the way the new system tends to spread recommendations out between books—that is, if you have 1,000 books, each book will get about one recommendation--reduces the problem. That and I think it's more important to give good lists than to remove badness. This is, after all, the Google lesson--bad data is okay in the context of lots and lots of data, most of it good.
As recommendations are calculated "on-the-fly" when based on our own tags, why not allow recommendations based on any search. librarybooks could then key in tag:-children.
That would be an elegant way to handle it, actually. What I need, basically, is a list of relevant book/works. Making a complex include-exclude list involves lots lots of user-interface work--another way of getting at the same tags shown on a million screens. But leveraging the catalog itself reduces that problem.
I'll look into it. The main concern is simple processing. The new system is a model citizen in terms of not hitting the database too much.
the unsuggester almost exclusivly returned Chick-lit and books written for the evangelical Christian set
For many others too. I think the unsuggester finds relatively isolated pockets--chick lit, knitting, evangelical-interest, tween lit. These are popular topics, but their popularity is not evenly spread; many large libraries contain not a single instance of them. It misses unpopular books few would read--some obscure academic study, for example. There are a lot of those--not least in my library--but they aren't popular enough to be noticed in the statistics so much. So the Unsuggester is basically "books you've heard about, and should avoid." That's better, I think, than getting lots of recommendations for Finnish linguistics studies.
Weirdly enough, I too have Gaudy Night high on my list of unsuggestions, despite owning it. The algorithm just doesn't like it, I guess...
No, it's probably a combination issue. If the work got combined while the unsuggester was runnning—and it days days to run--then it could spot a big difference between the number of GN's it thought it would see and the number it did. But it was working off an old workcode.
Christian non-fiction
It's certainly true that literary fiction tends to prompt Protestant non-fiction. Of course, it doesn't mean that readers of the two have no overlaps--although two of you have said you didn't catalog those books, so what is LT supposed to do, guess? But I do suspect there are a fair number of religious-only libraries, and combined with the broad appeal of literary ficiton, those libraries come off as "islands" statistically. That and I suspect literary-fiction readers overlap more with the other common unsuggestions--knitting, chick lit and tween lit.
Good to hear.
Can I just add my vote for a refinement that takes into consideration our star-rating.
I'll think about it, but for now I'm focused on keeping things as trim as possible. While I understand your arguments, the extra thinking involved bothers me.
Incidentally, I forgot to ask: How are member recommendations ranked?
Oh, recentness. When a book is recommended more than once, by the recenter recommendation.
librarybooks: Also, is/could there be a way to filter OUT a given tag
Yes, it could be done. I'm trying, however, to provide a limited set of tools. It seems to me if exclude-by-tag is useful, you can get much the same--and much more--from "focus by tag" as we have now.
I do understand that members want more, and I may cave. (I caved on focusing by tag rather than filtering exclusively, pushed by _Zoe_ among others and she was dead-right.) But I always need to keep in mind that features are like children. They need to be fed. They grow up in weird ways. I'd rather have fewer children than raise them poorly :)
Any chance of retunring the 'omit books by authors already owned' as was previously present!
Well, maybe you can get up a campaign, but the overall absence of this request is pretty interesting to me. I think the way the new system tends to spread recommendations out between books—that is, if you have 1,000 books, each book will get about one recommendation--reduces the problem. That and I think it's more important to give good lists than to remove badness. This is, after all, the Google lesson--bad data is okay in the context of lots and lots of data, most of it good.
As recommendations are calculated "on-the-fly" when based on our own tags, why not allow recommendations based on any search. librarybooks could then key in tag:-children.
That would be an elegant way to handle it, actually. What I need, basically, is a list of relevant book/works. Making a complex include-exclude list involves lots lots of user-interface work--another way of getting at the same tags shown on a million screens. But leveraging the catalog itself reduces that problem.
I'll look into it. The main concern is simple processing. The new system is a model citizen in terms of not hitting the database too much.
the unsuggester almost exclusivly returned Chick-lit and books written for the evangelical Christian set
For many others too. I think the unsuggester finds relatively isolated pockets--chick lit, knitting, evangelical-interest, tween lit. These are popular topics, but their popularity is not evenly spread; many large libraries contain not a single instance of them. It misses unpopular books few would read--some obscure academic study, for example. There are a lot of those--not least in my library--but they aren't popular enough to be noticed in the statistics so much. So the Unsuggester is basically "books you've heard about, and should avoid." That's better, I think, than getting lots of recommendations for Finnish linguistics studies.
Weirdly enough, I too have Gaudy Night high on my list of unsuggestions, despite owning it. The algorithm just doesn't like it, I guess...
No, it's probably a combination issue. If the work got combined while the unsuggester was runnning—and it days days to run--then it could spot a big difference between the number of GN's it thought it would see and the number it did. But it was working off an old workcode.
Christian non-fiction
It's certainly true that literary fiction tends to prompt Protestant non-fiction. Of course, it doesn't mean that readers of the two have no overlaps--although two of you have said you didn't catalog those books, so what is LT supposed to do, guess? But I do suspect there are a fair number of religious-only libraries, and combined with the broad appeal of literary ficiton, those libraries come off as "islands" statistically. That and I suspect literary-fiction readers overlap more with the other common unsuggestions--knitting, chick lit and tween lit.
22infiniteletters
I'd prefer "No thanks!" over "filter out a tag", as there are certain books (& authors) I dislike within genres I do like.
The new lists are long enough that I don't miss the "omit books by authors already owned". :)
The unsuggestions list found some stuff that sounds interesting, actually, such as Tales before Tolkien for my fantasy/sci-fi/children's library, so that seems like a small glitch.
As for the guessing, it also found a book on evolutionary biology, but I haven't put most of my science books in yet.
I guess I don't fully understand the people who want rankings based on star ratings. It would need to be based on people who either rated the same book high or low, when there may not even be any, or you may not agree with the rest of their ratings.
The new lists are long enough that I don't miss the "omit books by authors already owned". :)
The unsuggestions list found some stuff that sounds interesting, actually, such as Tales before Tolkien for my fantasy/sci-fi/children's library, so that seems like a small glitch.
As for the guessing, it also found a book on evolutionary biology, but I haven't put most of my science books in yet.
I guess I don't fully understand the people who want rankings based on star ratings. It would need to be based on people who either rated the same book high or low, when there may not even be any, or you may not agree with the rest of their ratings.
23lilithcat
Most of my "unsuggestion" list is spot on, but there are some very odd exceptions, such as The Passion by Jeanette Winterson. Not only do I have six books by Winterson in my catalogue -- The Passion is one of them!
I'm another person with Gaudy Night on the list --- despite the fact that it is one of my favorite books ever!
There are actually a fair number of "unsuggestions" that I've read and enjoyed, and quite a few more that look interesting.
I'm another person with Gaudy Night on the list --- despite the fact that it is one of my favorite books ever!
There are actually a fair number of "unsuggestions" that I've read and enjoyed, and quite a few more that look interesting.
24jjwilson61
As far as using ratings, I'm not sure that it matters that much if other people use them or not. If I rate a book a 1, it seems common sense to not recommend books that correlate with that one (although I might like books that are tagged or have subjects that match that one). So I don't think the argument that not many people rate books is valid.
25lorax
Any reason why the numbers are incomplete even when I have "show all recommendations" selected? Mine skip 1 and 3, and appear to be complete from 4 on down.
26markbarnes
For what it's worth only two of my first 100 unsuggestions I would ever contemplate reading. Of these, one of them is a popular book I'm sure I will hate, but feel I ought to read because it's irrational to hate a book I've never read!
27VictoriaPL
I would really like a 'no thanks' or 'don't recommend this to me again' button.
28infiniteletters
24: "books that correlate with that one (although I might like books that are tagged or have subjects that match that one)"
How would you define correlate, besides "tagged or have subjects that match that one"?
How would you define correlate, besides "tagged or have subjects that match that one"?
29BillDrew
I like the recommendations as well. It is interesting to see books I have read but do not own pop up in it. To me that is evidence that it is working.
30bnielsen
#29, yes I see that as well.
But I miss the first recommendation. My first page is nr 2-101,
the second page is 100-200, the third page is 200-300. etc
I think it is a feature to go 100-200 rather than 101-200, but
where did number 1 go ? Am I the only one who sees this bug ?
I'm running FF on Linpus.
But I miss the first recommendation. My first page is nr 2-101,
the second page is 100-200, the third page is 200-300. etc
I think it is a feature to go 100-200 rather than 101-200, but
where did number 1 go ? Am I the only one who sees this bug ?
I'm running FF on Linpus.
31lorax
bnielsen (30), I don't see a #1 (or, for that matter, #3) on my recommendations either. It is not a browser issue; when I look at your recommendations I see the same as you do (no #1, but everything else), and I see #1 for Tim's recommendations. Combination issues, or when "books you own" are filtered vs. when the list is generated?
32jjwilson61
28> I was using correlate in the sense of books that go together in a lot of people's libraries, which is the major way that recommendations work. I believe Tim said that matching tags and subjects accounts for about 25% of the weight in the recommendations.
33BGP
I love it, although I agree with a handful of other users before me (on this thread and the last): it would be great to have a "banish this suggestion" option.
Re 30, 31: I am also seeing a bit of drunken math (particularly in the enumeration of my Unsuggestions)...
Re 30, 31: I am also seeing a bit of drunken math (particularly in the enumeration of my Unsuggestions)...
34thorold
I can understand why I have Shopaholics, John Piper and knitting books in the Unsuggester list, but it seems strange to see things in the list where there are only one or two copies on LT. I don't dispute that I'm unlikely to acquire a copy of Revue d'Histoire Ecclésiastique, Vol. LXXVI, no. 1, but the one person who owns it has 51 books in common with me, at least some of which are fairly obscure, so I don't think there could be any very good statistical evidence to say I wouldn't enjoy it.
I have Gaudy Night and Even cowgirls get the blues in the Unsuggester list too, even though I own copies of both - I have a sneaking suspicion that Tim's feeding us all the same list!
I have Gaudy Night and Even cowgirls get the blues in the Unsuggester list too, even though I own copies of both - I have a sneaking suspicion that Tim's feeding us all the same list!
35kaelirenee
I'll second Victoria's request for a "no thanks" or "don't recommend" button, too-because I have a fair few books on Wicca, I seem to be getting every Silver Ravenwolf book ever written and I can't stand her books.
But, until that happens, I certainly don't want to give you a bunch of unruly children to chase after. I'm already finding too much to read...if there is such a thing.
But, until that happens, I certainly don't want to give you a bunch of unruly children to chase after. I'm already finding too much to read...if there is such a thing.
36citygirl
I frickin' love this thing, Tim. So much so that I am afraid that my little ten minute LT break from work has turned into 40. I've already made a recommendation (if you like 1984, try The Handmaid's Tale), checked mine (which are pretty good) and my Unsuggester. What's funny is that my Unsuggester, like others it appears, has given me a list that is almost all Christian theology, Christian self-help, Christian whatever. While it is true that I will probably never read any of those books, I wonder if the Unsuggester thinks I'd read anything else? What is also interesting, is that those anti-recommendations are not based on the books in my library that challenge Christianity, but mostly on the contemporary literature and some religion-free non-fiction I have. Interesting.
Tim, I cannot express how fabulous I think you are without sounding like a sycophant or a groupie. (Tim groupie? What would that be like?: "Ooh, Tim, your fingers move so fast across the keyboard. Ooh, Tim can I get you some more Red Bull? Ooh, Tim, talk dirty code to me.")
Anyway, you rock.
Tim, I cannot express how fabulous I think you are without sounding like a sycophant or a groupie. (Tim groupie? What would that be like?: "Ooh, Tim, your fingers move so fast across the keyboard. Ooh, Tim can I get you some more Red Bull? Ooh, Tim, talk dirty code to me.")
Anyway, you rock.
37pennylegionbooks
I don't know how easy this would be to implement, but have you thought of adding a StumbleUpon-like way for users to refine their (un)suggestions? Is there any way that the (un)suggester could "learn" through our approval or disapproval of recommended items?
I noticed that my unsuggester list includes a number of books I'd be quite interested in reading, including books of types which are in my library and books by authors who are in my library. As with many people, for example, it's throwing up Christian theological texts because I have lots of fantasy and science fiction ... but I also have lots of Christian theology.
And, yes, it's un-suggesting Gaudy Night even though I own (and adore) it. There are lots of little wrinkles like that -- and lots of automatically recommended books I'm absolutely uninterested in (and some I own).
What if there was a thumbs up/thumbs down option beside each option, as there are for reviews? Would that be something that might work?
I noticed that my unsuggester list includes a number of books I'd be quite interested in reading, including books of types which are in my library and books by authors who are in my library. As with many people, for example, it's throwing up Christian theological texts because I have lots of fantasy and science fiction ... but I also have lots of Christian theology.
And, yes, it's un-suggesting Gaudy Night even though I own (and adore) it. There are lots of little wrinkles like that -- and lots of automatically recommended books I'm absolutely uninterested in (and some I own).
What if there was a thumbs up/thumbs down option beside each option, as there are for reviews? Would that be something that might work?
38reconditereader
Hunh, what *has* gone wrong with Gaudy Night? I have it rated 5 stars and it UnSuggests it like everyone else. Still-- fun!
I do suspect it only has a few UnSuggest lists it's churning out for all of us-- mine's largely Christian nonfic with a few very popular titles I don't own, many of them chick-lit. Perhaps a grumpy gnome in the system? It's true, though, I pretty much *don't* want to read those books! Ha ha. Oh the recommendations page... so many books to read, so little time....
I do suspect it only has a few UnSuggest lists it's churning out for all of us-- mine's largely Christian nonfic with a few very popular titles I don't own, many of them chick-lit. Perhaps a grumpy gnome in the system? It's true, though, I pretty much *don't* want to read those books! Ha ha. Oh the recommendations page... so many books to read, so little time....
39timspalding
Yeah, Gaudy Night clearly changed work codes while the list was being compiled. It expected X, but it always gets 0. So, it must not be popular in that group—or any.
40koffieyahoo
What is black vs. blue/purple at the top of the recommendations page, i.e. which kind of reccomendation I'm looking at, doesn't change along properly when I change what I'm lloking at. For example, if I switch from "Automatic Recommendations" to "Member Recommendations", "Automatic Recommendations" stays black. Moreover, Recommendations itslef doesn't turn black (same problem occurs in the case of statistics).
What I'm really missing, btw: The top 100, or so, of most popular books on LT filtered by the books in my library.
What I'm really missing, btw: The top 100, or so, of most popular books on LT filtered by the books in my library.
41timspalding
>What I'm really missing, btw: The top 100, or so, of most popular books on LT filtered by the books in my library.
Ah, yes. Good point. I'm glad to hear someone missed it.
Ah, yes. Good point. I'm glad to hear someone missed it.
42oregonobsessionz
Oh no, I just added a slew of books to my wishlist, which was already unwieldy.
I would definitely like to filter the recommendations list, as in tag: -quilting. I have quite a few books on quilt/textile history, and my recommended list is dominated by general interest and beginner quilt books that I most emphatically do not want.
Perhaps the oddest recommendation is Reptile Medicine and Surgery, because I have biographies of Herbert Hoover and J. Edgar Hoover. Is the Suggester saying they were snakes (in the grass)?
It is wonderful to have the Unsuggester again. My unsuggested list is dominated by chick lit, teen lit, fantasy, vampires, Chuck Palahniuk, and Christian titles. Fair enough, I don’t want to read any of those. Curiously, several of my knitting books are unsuggested because I have civil war books and presidential biographies, and vice versa.
I would definitely like to filter the recommendations list, as in tag: -quilting. I have quite a few books on quilt/textile history, and my recommended list is dominated by general interest and beginner quilt books that I most emphatically do not want.
Perhaps the oddest recommendation is Reptile Medicine and Surgery, because I have biographies of Herbert Hoover and J. Edgar Hoover. Is the Suggester saying they were snakes (in the grass)?
It is wonderful to have the Unsuggester again. My unsuggested list is dominated by chick lit, teen lit, fantasy, vampires, Chuck Palahniuk, and Christian titles. Fair enough, I don’t want to read any of those. Curiously, several of my knitting books are unsuggested because I have civil war books and presidential biographies, and vice versa.
43koffieyahoo
Funnily enough I would never read the first item on my recommendations list (Fullmetal Alchemist: The Land of Sand), but it's obvious to me why it's there. While, on the other hand, I might give Myra Breckinridge a try, which is the first in my Unsuggester list.
41>
I'm a list junkie, and that's probably the most important Zeitgeist list on LT.
41>
I'm a list junkie, and that's probably the most important Zeitgeist list on LT.
44persky
>21 timspalding:
>>Can I just add my vote for a refinement that takes into consideration our star-rating.
>I'll think about it, but for now I'm focused on keeping things as trim as possible. While I understand your arguments, the extra thinking involved bothers me.
To me, the best argument for discarding star rating is that this value is distributed differently for different libraries. One could try to correct for this by normalizing star ratings on a per-library basis before merging (e.g., if I rate most of my books "4", then a "4" from me should be equivalent to a "3" from someone with a median rating of "3") but this assumes equivalently "good" libraries (i.e., we can't distinguish a library with lots of "4"s due to an indulgent reviewer vs. a library with lots of "4"s because it only contains that member's favorite books).
A more conservative use of the star ratings would be to consider only the ratings within the library for which the suggestions are being generated.
(I think that this is markbarnes's point in post 9 and jjwilson61's in post 24).
>>Can I just add my vote for a refinement that takes into consideration our star-rating.
>I'll think about it, but for now I'm focused on keeping things as trim as possible. While I understand your arguments, the extra thinking involved bothers me.
To me, the best argument for discarding star rating is that this value is distributed differently for different libraries. One could try to correct for this by normalizing star ratings on a per-library basis before merging (e.g., if I rate most of my books "4", then a "4" from me should be equivalent to a "3" from someone with a median rating of "3") but this assumes equivalently "good" libraries (i.e., we can't distinguish a library with lots of "4"s due to an indulgent reviewer vs. a library with lots of "4"s because it only contains that member's favorite books).
A more conservative use of the star ratings would be to consider only the ratings within the library for which the suggestions are being generated.
(I think that this is markbarnes's point in post 9 and jjwilson61's in post 24).
45persky
>21 timspalding:
>Christian non-fiction
>It's certainly true that literary fiction tends to prompt Protestant non-fiction. Of course, it doesn't mean that readers of the two have no overlaps--although two of you have said you didn't catalog those books, so what is LT supposed to do, guess? But I do suspect there are a fair number of religious-only libraries, and combined with the broad appeal of literary ficiton, those libraries come off as "islands" statistically. That and I suspect literary-fiction readers overlap more with the other common unsuggestions--knitting, chick lit and tween lit.
Most of my Christian non-fiction unsuggestions seem to be prompted by comics/graphic novels (The Sandman, Johnny the Homicidal Maniac, Maus, ect.) and sci-fi/fantasy (Blood Music, A Wizard Alone, The Crystal City, etc.) including a lot of Orson Scott Card's Mormon influenced works (all of the above are highly represented in my library, so this is not that surprising).
It is interesting to think about the space of "non-trivial unsuggestions": the "books you've heard about but should avoid" that are more interesting than the "statistical islands". For my library, I'm thinking things like The Fountainhead,
Lord of the Flies, and The Golden Compass. (Really good would be to suggest The Horse and His Boy and unsuggest The Last Battle). It would be cool if the member unsuggestions turn out to be a useful gold standard for tuning the statistical unsuggestions.
>Christian non-fiction
>It's certainly true that literary fiction tends to prompt Protestant non-fiction. Of course, it doesn't mean that readers of the two have no overlaps--although two of you have said you didn't catalog those books, so what is LT supposed to do, guess? But I do suspect there are a fair number of religious-only libraries, and combined with the broad appeal of literary ficiton, those libraries come off as "islands" statistically. That and I suspect literary-fiction readers overlap more with the other common unsuggestions--knitting, chick lit and tween lit.
Most of my Christian non-fiction unsuggestions seem to be prompted by comics/graphic novels (The Sandman, Johnny the Homicidal Maniac, Maus, ect.) and sci-fi/fantasy (Blood Music, A Wizard Alone, The Crystal City, etc.) including a lot of Orson Scott Card's Mormon influenced works (all of the above are highly represented in my library, so this is not that surprising).
It is interesting to think about the space of "non-trivial unsuggestions": the "books you've heard about but should avoid" that are more interesting than the "statistical islands". For my library, I'm thinking things like The Fountainhead,
Lord of the Flies, and The Golden Compass. (Really good would be to suggest The Horse and His Boy and unsuggest The Last Battle). It would be cool if the member unsuggestions turn out to be a useful gold standard for tuning the statistical unsuggestions.
46jjwilson61
I don't think there's any way that you'd be able to suggest The Horse and His Boy and unsuggest The Last Battle unless you take ratings into account, as I suspect a lot of the Narnia books are owned in complete sets (for those who only catalog what they own) or have been read as a complete set (for those who catalog everything that they have ever read).
47tortoise
I was just thinking about non-trivial unsuggestions too! One possible algorithmic way to look for them would be to look at books which aren't likely to be contained in libraries similar to yours, relative to the odds that they're contained in other libraries similar to those libraries. That is, books whose frequency seems to "decrease rapidly" near you in the space of all libraries, as opposed to books whose frequency is low near you.
48timspalding
>47 tortoise:
That's how it works, but book-by-book, not user-by-user. Basically, take a book, find out all its owners, find out what they have, compare what they have to the expected number they ought to have. Voila.
What you're suggesting is good, but also very data-intensive.
That's how it works, but book-by-book, not user-by-user. Basically, take a book, find out all its owners, find out what they have, compare what they have to the expected number they ought to have. Voila.
What you're suggesting is good, but also very data-intensive.
49hailelib
I noticed yesterday that some sections of my library generate Unsuggestions that other sections of my library might well throw up as Suggestions. In fact a few of the Unsuggestions are books I have read and enjoyed but don't own and thus haven't cataloged. However, the vast majority really are books that I would probably never read.
50veracity
Hi, I don't normally comment in the forums, but I would like to say that I'm a bit flummoxed by the new recommendations I am getting with the new recommender, eg. loads of "little house" books, for instance, that are by someone other than Laura Ingalls Wilder(?!). I understand the reasons those books are recommended, but would really like to be able to exclude these books in particular and children's books in general from my recommendations (yes, I know - I can 'no thanks' these books individually, but that is tedious). I would also prefer the old 'fiction' and 'non-fiction' split.
51nperrin
Tim, what happens if I no-thanks an individual book? Am I just hiding it from myself, or am I affecting the recommendations more deeply?
52pennylegionbooks
Hmm... paging through again this morning, I am starting to notice books which appear on both lists. Is this happening for anyone else?
53infiniteletters
I'd also like the "most popular books" list back.
"Tim, what happens if I no-thanks an individual book? Am I just hiding it from myself, or am I affecting the recommendations more deeply?"
Along with an answer to this from 51, I'd also like a list of the "no thanks!" books, or maybe just stick 'em in unsuggester? :)
Tiny Bug: I clicked Cancel on the delete forever dialog, and it gave me a blank page with null in the top left corner. I had to go back to reach the recommendations again (FF, MacOS X). This is reproducible.
Small bug: On a "recs from my tags" page, why has (loading), which then vanishes, but doesn't show any titles. Close why makes it go back to why. It works fine on the "all recs" page.
"Tim, what happens if I no-thanks an individual book? Am I just hiding it from myself, or am I affecting the recommendations more deeply?"
Along with an answer to this from 51, I'd also like a list of the "no thanks!" books, or maybe just stick 'em in unsuggester? :)
Tiny Bug: I clicked Cancel on the delete forever dialog, and it gave me a blank page with null in the top left corner. I had to go back to reach the recommendations again (FF, MacOS X). This is reproducible.
Small bug: On a "recs from my tags" page, why has (loading), which then vanishes, but doesn't show any titles. Close why makes it go back to why. It works fine on the "all recs" page.
54apple2e
This is the oddest Recommendation I have found in my list (so far)...
# Elbisch. Grammatik, Schrift und Wörterbuch der Elben-Sprache von J. R. R. Tolkien by Helmut W. Pesch
23 copies. Average rating 4. Why? (close why) Recommendation based on:
Men at Arms by Terry Pratchett
Monstrous Regiment by Terry Pratchett
Interesting Times by Terry Pratchett
Pity I don't read German to find out how good the recommendation is.
# Elbisch. Grammatik, Schrift und Wörterbuch der Elben-Sprache von J. R. R. Tolkien by Helmut W. Pesch
23 copies. Average rating 4. Why? (close why) Recommendation based on:
Men at Arms by Terry Pratchett
Monstrous Regiment by Terry Pratchett
Interesting Times by Terry Pratchett
Pity I don't read German to find out how good the recommendation is.
55LolaWalser
It's excellent, if you want to learn Elvish.
56staffordcastle
Better and better!
One thing I would like would be "Next" and "Previous" page buttons; when I use the browser back button, it kicks me back to my profile page.
Also, when I click on the next page number, the new page loads at the same place the previous one was at; e.g., if I'm at the bottom of page 3, page 4 loads at the bottom of the page. This is kind of awkward. I'm using IE 6 on Windows XP 5.1.
Another oddness; in several cases (though not all) when I clicked on "Why?", all I got was "Close Why?" - no list of titles the recommendation was based on.
BTW, thanks for putting in the "Close Why?" link!
One thing I would like would be "Next" and "Previous" page buttons; when I use the browser back button, it kicks me back to my profile page.
Also, when I click on the next page number, the new page loads at the same place the previous one was at; e.g., if I'm at the bottom of page 3, page 4 loads at the bottom of the page. This is kind of awkward. I'm using IE 6 on Windows XP 5.1.
Another oddness; in several cases (though not all) when I clicked on "Why?", all I got was "Close Why?" - no list of titles the recommendation was based on.
BTW, thanks for putting in the "Close Why?" link!
57VictoriaPL
Tim, how often do the recommendations refresh?
58citygirl
Has the option to permanently exclude recommendations been there from the start or is it new? Whichever, I think it's a great idea. Also, will new books take the place of the ones deleted from the list?
59jjwilson61
It's new and I don't know.
60markbarnes
>57 VictoriaPL: They refresh every 24 hours unless you have less than 200 books. See Tim's message.
61prosfilaes
The Unsuggestions seem a little monotonous. timspalding and I share only 10 books, but his top 5 unsuggestions are #1, #11, #4, #15, and #20 on my unsuggestion list. The one I really don't understand is Insensitive Semantics: A Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism, which shows up for WilliamCongreve and I, even though (a) I might enjoy it, (b) WilliamCongreve and I have no formal overlapping and pretty minimal conceptual overlapping in our libraries, and (c) it has 5 copies in the system, which makes it pretty questionable as an unsuggestion.
As for suggestions, I wonder if it might not be necessary to have a "don't use this book for suggestions". I keep knocking books that are recommended by the books in the Sammlung Göschen series, like the five books on electrochemistry. Unfortunately, I keep them because they're tiny, old and part of a really cool series, not because I have any interest in electrochemistry.
As for suggestions, I wonder if it might not be necessary to have a "don't use this book for suggestions". I keep knocking books that are recommended by the books in the Sammlung Göschen series, like the five books on electrochemistry. Unfortunately, I keep them because they're tiny, old and part of a really cool series, not because I have any interest in electrochemistry.
62prosfilaes
Um, I said "no thanks" to a couple items on bluetyson's Suggestion list. I expect--and hope--that it didn't do anything permanent, but even the illusion that you do so is probably a bad thing.
63timspalding
Tim, what happens if I no-thanks an individual book? Am I just hiding it from myself, or am I affecting the recommendations more deeply?
Just yourself. I love using data, but I can't see how to use it generally. There's probably a way to leverage it for your recomemendations--go easy on books that are similar to books you've dismissed. But, meh.
I'd also like the "most popular books" list back.
I'll bring it back. Give me a little while.
Tiny Bug: I clicked Cancel on the delete forever dialog, and it gave me a blank page with null in the top left corner.
Fixed.
Small bug: On a "recs from my tags" page, why has (loading), which then vanishes, but doesn't show any titles. Close why makes it go back to why. It works fine on the "all recs" page.
I'm not getting this—also on OSX FF. Hmm.
Tim, how often do the recommendations refresh?
Every 24 hours. I need to add links to see recent ones, etc.
Just yourself. I love using data, but I can't see how to use it generally. There's probably a way to leverage it for your recomemendations--go easy on books that are similar to books you've dismissed. But, meh.
I'd also like the "most popular books" list back.
I'll bring it back. Give me a little while.
Tiny Bug: I clicked Cancel on the delete forever dialog, and it gave me a blank page with null in the top left corner.
Fixed.
Small bug: On a "recs from my tags" page, why has (loading), which then vanishes, but doesn't show any titles. Close why makes it go back to why. It works fine on the "all recs" page.
I'm not getting this—also on OSX FF. Hmm.
Tim, how often do the recommendations refresh?
Every 24 hours. I need to add links to see recent ones, etc.
64timspalding
>62 prosfilaes:
Fixed. No, you didn't change his stuff. But you did change yours--you'll never get those recommendations...
Fixed. No, you didn't change his stuff. But you did change yours--you'll never get those recommendations...
65nperrin
63: Just yourself. I love using data, but I can't see how to use it generally. There's probably a way to leverage it for your recomemendations--go easy on books that are similar to books you've dismissed. But, meh.
No, that's good. I mean it might be cool to use the data if you could come up with a smart way, but then I would always have to be stressing about whether to say "no thanks" or not because of some unknown further effect it might have.
ETA: And, this way, I can say no thanks to books I've read but don't own without implying I didn't like them.
No, that's good. I mean it might be cool to use the data if you could come up with a smart way, but then I would always have to be stressing about whether to say "no thanks" or not because of some unknown further effect it might have.
ETA: And, this way, I can say no thanks to books I've read but don't own without implying I didn't like them.
66infiniteletters
Small bug: On a "recs from my tags" page, why has (loading), which then vanishes, but doesn't show any titles. Close why makes it go back to why. It works fine on the "all recs" page.
It's only happening on some recs, which are all from my tags set. But it's reproducible with each book. (At the very least, we should get the "just because" error message back. :)
Here's a testset for you. My tag Early Reviewer produces 17 recommendations.
1-3 show why. 4-17 don't. Have fun bug hunting.
1 Dog Man: An Uncommon Life on a Faraway Mountain by Martha Sherrill
2 Dervishes: A Novel by Beth Helms
3 Olive Kitteridge: A Novel in Stories by Elizabeth Strout
4 Every Last Cuckoo: A Novel by Kate Maloy
5 Atomic Lobster: A Novel by Tim Dorsey
It's only happening on some recs, which are all from my tags set. But it's reproducible with each book. (At the very least, we should get the "just because" error message back. :)
Here's a testset for you. My tag Early Reviewer produces 17 recommendations.
1-3 show why. 4-17 don't. Have fun bug hunting.
1 Dog Man: An Uncommon Life on a Faraway Mountain by Martha Sherrill
2 Dervishes: A Novel by Beth Helms
3 Olive Kitteridge: A Novel in Stories by Elizabeth Strout
4 Every Last Cuckoo: A Novel by Kate Maloy
5 Atomic Lobster: A Novel by Tim Dorsey
67timspalding
I think I'll do some laundry instead...
68infiniteletters
67: Things'll get cleaner either way. :)
69tortoise
65: Yeah, in order to get any useful information out of the "no thanks" button, you'd presumably have to split it into "I already know about this book" and "I'm not interested". Which might be too cluttered.
70rsterling
Before I start wildly no-thanking things, I was wondering whether it is possible to undo that later, and/or to pull up a list of things we've no-thanked?
71AnnaClaire
On a similar line, does no-thanking simply remove a book from the list (as in, "I've already read Jane Eyre but thanks anyway"), or does the system take it to mean that I don't want similar books either (as in, "what the heck is that doing there?")?
For people like me who catalog what we own and not what we have read (and have no interest in changing that thankyouverymuch), removing books we've borrowed and read is a good thing -- but not if it's going to skew the results the wrong way. I rather liked Jane Eyre and would not be too thrilled if her friends kept away because I read Mom's copy instead of buying one of my own.
For people like me who catalog what we own and not what we have read (and have no interest in changing that thankyouverymuch), removing books we've borrowed and read is a good thing -- but not if it's going to skew the results the wrong way. I rather liked Jane Eyre and would not be too thrilled if her friends kept away because I read Mom's copy instead of buying one of my own.
72jjwilson61
Tim answered this in msg 63. It just removes it from the list.
73AnnaClaire
I see now. I'm just too damn tired right now to have read the several dozen posts that had accumulated. (Off to sleep now.)
74andyhat
Would it be possible to have a "I own this (in some edition which I will catalog later)" option for recommendations? I hate to click "No, thanks!" on recommendations that are so accurate I already own the book but just haven't cataloged it yet. By my quick count, 56 of my top 101 recommendations are in this category, which makes it hard to find the new books.
And, yes, I realize I ought to just hurry up and enter the rest of my collection, but I estimate I'm still several years from having it all in.
And, yes, I realize I ought to just hurry up and enter the rest of my collection, but I estimate I'm still several years from having it all in.
75VictoriaPL
I'm really enjoying these... but curses, I need more BookMooch points! Anyway, one minor quibble, it doesn't always 'remember' where I was on the list. For instance, I'll click on a book on page 4 of the recommendations and when I click on the back arrow, it returns me to page 1 of the recommendations...
76AnnaClaire
>74 andyhat:
A general "good recommendation but hide it anyway" might be a better idea, as it would also cover things like my read-but-unowned books.
A general "good recommendation but hide it anyway" might be a better idea, as it would also cover things like my read-but-unowned books.
77jjwilson61
I think the non-judgemental "No Thanks" is supposed to stand in for all these reasons for rejecting a recommendation and since they would all do the same thing behind the scenes I don't see the need for more choices.
78eromsted
Do the LC subject recommendations figure into the new list? Based on some of the selections in my list, I'm guessing they do. The LC subject recs are fine on the individual book pages, especially when there are too few copies to calculate recs based on ownership. However, for the combined list I think they detract main benefit of LT recommendations, which is to show actual common ownership, not just shared topics.
79jjwilson61
I may be misremembering, but I think Tom said that the ownership stats are about 75% of the recommendations and subject and tag stats are the rest.
80andyhat
#77: There may be no difference on the back-end now, but if in future dismissed items are used as disrecommendations in the engine, it'd be better to flag now whether the dismissal was because it was bad recommendation or if it was such a good recommendation the book has already been purchased or read.
81BGP
>80 andyhat: Well, the system is already keeping track of books which we have dismissed, no? Therefore, if Tim and Co. do decide to do something cool the data, they could easily create a new page within the recommendation section of a user's profile for "rejected recommendations."
There's no reason to worry...
There's no reason to worry...
82AnnaClaire
>81 BGP:
Until I actually see a promise from The Powers That Be that taking into account our rejections will not happen until we can un-reject them, I'm leaving them in. I don't want to find out six months from now that I've screwed up my own recommendations.
Until I actually see a promise from The Powers That Be that taking into account our rejections will not happen until we can un-reject them, I'm leaving them in. I don't want to find out six months from now that I've screwed up my own recommendations.
84timspalding
bumps back
85markbarnes
Slightly off topic, but are there any plans for a "Will I like this?" button on work pages? I often come onto LT when I hear of new books, but if there are no reviews or few ratings it sometimes doesn't help. (This feature could examine the Suggester and Unsuggester lists for a given work, and give some kind of rating.)
86eromsted
In general I like the new recommendations page, especially the filtering options, but after playing with it for a bit I have two requests and a thought:
1. Exclude tags used less than 5 times from the list of personal tags. They probably won't produce recommendations anyway and they add a lot of clutter.
2. Find some way to mark the "Why?" lists to show which algorithm generated the books listed. To me, the "people who own this also own" functions are very different from the "similar tags" and "similar LC subjects" functions. If these are still being run independently and then aggregated, it seems like there would be some way to mark the lists to show how they were generated. I would find this useful on the individual work pages as well, although there I have the option to go to "more recommendations" and see for myself.
The thought is on the possibility of publication date filter. It's true that there is no way to get a true work level publication date, but couldn't one be approximated by taking the earliest date from the associated detail pages. It would be wrong frequently, but it would likely be right often enough to be useful. The CK date might also be used when available.
1. Exclude tags used less than 5 times from the list of personal tags. They probably won't produce recommendations anyway and they add a lot of clutter.
2. Find some way to mark the "Why?" lists to show which algorithm generated the books listed. To me, the "people who own this also own" functions are very different from the "similar tags" and "similar LC subjects" functions. If these are still being run independently and then aggregated, it seems like there would be some way to mark the lists to show how they were generated. I would find this useful on the individual work pages as well, although there I have the option to go to "more recommendations" and see for myself.
The thought is on the possibility of publication date filter. It's true that there is no way to get a true work level publication date, but couldn't one be approximated by taking the earliest date from the associated detail pages. It would be wrong frequently, but it would likely be right often enough to be useful. The CK date might also be used when available.
87infiniteletters
86: Or, since the recommendations are cached, why not hide the ones that don't produce any recommendations? Then have a "these tags don't have enough books to make recommendations. Very sad." or another tagline with a list.
I'd like a way to search for particular authors or titles across the recomendation pages, or to see a list of the single-book-source recommendations. Ooo, and could the book-sources under why link to the works? :D And a pony. I definitely need a pony.
The algorithm source part would be at least vaguely interesting too. Not as concerned with the publication date filter.
I'd like a way to search for particular authors or titles across the recomendation pages, or to see a list of the single-book-source recommendations. Ooo, and could the book-sources under why link to the works? :D And a pony. I definitely need a pony.
The algorithm source part would be at least vaguely interesting too. Not as concerned with the publication date filter.
88lilithcat
Two questions, Tim!
Now that we can say "no, thanks!", the list of recommendations drops below the 1,000 mark (I'm at 789 and that will continue to drop as I go through the list). Not that I need 1,000 recommendations, but is there some point at which the list will re-calculate to that number?
Second question: has any thought been given to allowing us to say "no, thanks" to the Member Recommendations? Again, some I've read and some I have no interest in reading. It's not too big a deal now, as there are only 37 on the page, but as more people add recommendations this page could get unwieldy and it would be nice to be able to whittle it down.
Now that we can say "no, thanks!", the list of recommendations drops below the 1,000 mark (I'm at 789 and that will continue to drop as I go through the list). Not that I need 1,000 recommendations, but is there some point at which the list will re-calculate to that number?
Second question: has any thought been given to allowing us to say "no, thanks" to the Member Recommendations? Again, some I've read and some I have no interest in reading. It's not too big a deal now, as there are only 37 on the page, but as more people add recommendations this page could get unwieldy and it would be nice to be able to whittle it down.
89eromsted
>87 infiniteletters: "Ooo, and could the book-sources under why link to the works?"
They already do, or at least they do for me.
They already do, or at least they do for me.
90timspalding
Exclude tags used less than 5 times from the list of personal tags. They probably won't produce recommendations anyway and they add a lot of clutter.
People will complain they're not there.
The thought is on the possibility of publication date filter. It's true that there is no way to get a true work level publication date, but couldn't one be approximated by taking the earliest date from the associated detail pages. It would be wrong frequently, but it would likely be right often enough to be useful. The CK date might also be used when available.
Yes, I've been thinking along those lines--not just for recommendations.
86: Or, since the recommendations are cached, why not hide the ones that don't produce any recommendations?
Smart, but, alas, they're not cached until they're requested.
Now that we can say "no, thanks!", the list of recommendations drops below the 1,000 mark (I'm at 789 and that will continue to drop as I go through the list). Not that I need 1,000 recommendations, but is there some point at which the list will re-calculate to that number?
You'll get some back as it changes. I think, thought that it takes off from the 1,000, whatever it is.
People will complain they're not there.
The thought is on the possibility of publication date filter. It's true that there is no way to get a true work level publication date, but couldn't one be approximated by taking the earliest date from the associated detail pages. It would be wrong frequently, but it would likely be right often enough to be useful. The CK date might also be used when available.
Yes, I've been thinking along those lines--not just for recommendations.
86: Or, since the recommendations are cached, why not hide the ones that don't produce any recommendations?
Smart, but, alas, they're not cached until they're requested.
Now that we can say "no, thanks!", the list of recommendations drops below the 1,000 mark (I'm at 789 and that will continue to drop as I go through the list). Not that I need 1,000 recommendations, but is there some point at which the list will re-calculate to that number?
You'll get some back as it changes. I think, thought that it takes off from the 1,000, whatever it is.
91Donogh
Loving this new feature, especially with inclusion of the "no thanks" option
One request/suggestion, some people with overlapping interests of mine are suggesting good books.
Is there a way to see all books suggested by a certain user, or even all books suggested by tag?
One request/suggestion, some people with overlapping interests of mine are suggesting good books.
Is there a way to see all books suggested by a certain user, or even all books suggested by tag?
92AnnaClaire
You'll get some back as it changes. I think, thought that it takes off from the 1,000, whatever it is. (#90)
So, you're saying that we'll see some new items appear on the list, but that it's not aiming to re-fill the reopened slots?
93AnnaClaire
I'm sure this has been covered, but I seem to be seeing a lot of this. For some recommendations, I'll click on the "why?" link and the "Recommendation based on:" text will appear, but without listing the basis for the recommendation. What gives?
94VictoriaPL
Mine started off at near 700 but now hovers around 350 every day.
95AnnaClaire
>94 VictoriaPL:
I tend to remove things very selectively, which is why my list shrunk by about 30. Thing is, it's been at the same place (about 970) since I removed what I removed.
I've added new books since then, so it's not like adding new stuff forced the list to recalculate itself.
I tend to remove things very selectively, which is why my list shrunk by about 30. Thing is, it's been at the same place (about 970) since I removed what I removed.
I've added new books since then, so it's not like adding new stuff forced the list to recalculate itself.
96eromsted
>80 andyhat:
>>Exclude tags used less than 5 times from the list of personal tags. They probably won't produce recommendations anyway and they add a lot of clutter.
>People will complain they're not there.
Well then, how about excluding tags used only once. Even that would significantly reduce my list, and they are truly meaningless for this function.
Or it could be optional, with a fill in box to restrict the list to tags used at least x times.
Anyway, thanks for the response.
>>Exclude tags used less than 5 times from the list of personal tags. They probably won't produce recommendations anyway and they add a lot of clutter.
>People will complain they're not there.
Well then, how about excluding tags used only once. Even that would significantly reduce my list, and they are truly meaningless for this function.
Or it could be optional, with a fill in box to restrict the list to tags used at least x times.
Anyway, thanks for the response.
97jjwilson61
I hate to mention it, but you could put the number of times that tag appears after the tag in the list. But I would prefer that you just remove the tags that are used only a few times.
99Aristocats
I love the new recommendations feature, it is by far the best compared with other sites (as LT is by far the best, too). I especially love the recommends based on my tags. I used to have a separate account where I tracked only the books I read (not the ones I own) just to get good recommends. Now I just mark the books I've read with a "read" tag, then go to Recommendations, click Show your tags and click the "read" tag. Awesome!
However, there are 2 small issues I wanted to mention:
a) The Why? link doesn't show any books - I find from time to time books in my recommendations list based on my "read" tag that puzzle me and I want to know why I got them - click on Why? and all that displays is "(close why) Recommendation based on:" but no list.
b) When the Why? link works, it lists some books with my "read" tag but also other books I own and I haven't marked as read yet. This is not really a problem, I just thought I should ask if this works as designed or the list should in fact show only the books I marked "read".
Thanks a lot for all you do, guys. I have to say it again and again: LT is (and you are) awesome!
However, there are 2 small issues I wanted to mention:
a) The Why? link doesn't show any books - I find from time to time books in my recommendations list based on my "read" tag that puzzle me and I want to know why I got them - click on Why? and all that displays is "(close why) Recommendation based on:" but no list.
b) When the Why? link works, it lists some books with my "read" tag but also other books I own and I haven't marked as read yet. This is not really a problem, I just thought I should ask if this works as designed or the list should in fact show only the books I marked "read".
Thanks a lot for all you do, guys. I have to say it again and again: LT is (and you are) awesome!
100infiniteletters
99: Yes, I get that "problem a" sometimes with "based on tag" recommendations. It's annoying.
Not sure about b.
Not sure about b.
