On 4/12/06, Kevin Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... Just to clarify one point, Credence strives hard to NOT be a > recommender system or referral system. I know the problems such systems > have, and we definitely put some thought into making credence not fall > into the same traps. But I will be interested to see if some of those > papers have something relevant to Credence's model.
i think you'll find there is a lot more similarity than expected. the main differences i've encountered seem to be pull vs. push and user interaction. the metrics and techniques used inside are often applicable to a wide variety of applications. (that is, the process that leads to recommendation is just as easily tied to a positive reputation. the feedback / metrics are often applicable to both) when you mentioned the update, did you mean code and not the paper? i see reference to the NSDI paper here: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/People/egs/credence/paper.html but no link. (do they require no prior publication?) thanks again for the explanations and pointers. _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list p2p-hackers@zgp.org http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers _______________________________________________ Here is a web page listing P2P Conferences: http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/PeerToPeerConferences
