Skip to main content
Log in

Mentor-spotting: recommending expert mentors to mentees for live trouble-shooting in Codementor

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Knowledge and Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Live mentoring services are recent novel social media, in which mentees can input expertise requests and wait for accepting some expert mentor who is willing to tackle the requests in a live and one-by-one manner. While mentee’s satisfaction of being mentored is determined by the matched mentor, it is crucial to have an effective mentor–mentee matching. This paper aims at recommending mentors based on the requests in Codementor, which is one of the popular live mentoring services. An accurate mentor recommendation will support the mentees’ decisions in finding suitable mentors, support the mentors’ decisions in filtering out irrelevant requests, and support the mentoring services’ decisions in assigning mentors to mentees. We divide the mentor recommendation problem into two tasks, Mentor Willingness Prediction (MWP) and Mentee Acceptance Prediction (MAP). MWP is to predict whether a mentor is willing to tackle a request, while MAP is to predict whether a mentee user will accept a recommended mentor. We propose to simultaneously deal with such two tasks by recommending a ranked list of mentors such that the recommended mentors who are really willing to tackle the request are as many as possible (MWP) and the final mentor who is accepted by the mentee can be ranked as high as possible (MAP). We develop four categories of features, availability, capability, activity, and proximity, to model the willingness of a mentor dealing with the request and the potential of a mentee to accept the recommended mentor. By applying various supervised learning methods, experimental results show the effectiveness of these features and provide extensive analyses to reveal more factors that can affect the quality of mentor recommendation. In addition, we also conduct a user study on Codementor platform to exhibit the practical performance of the proposed method. The innovation of this work includes the formulation of MWP and MAP problem in online mentoring services, feature engineering for mentoring prediction tasks, and data-driven experimental studies in prediction and a practical user study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.codementor.io/.

  2. https://hackhands.com/.

  3. https://www.airpair.com/.

  4. http://stackoverflow.com/.

  5. https://www.quora.com.

  6. https://answers.yahoo.com/.

  7. https://github.com/gamboviol/climf.

  8. http://sourceforge.net/p/lemur/wiki/RankLib/.

References

  1. Akehurst J, Koprinska I, Yacef K, Pizzato L, Kay J, Rej T (2011) CCR—a content-collaborative reciprocal recommender for online dating. In: Proceedings of IJCAI, pp 2199–2204

  2. Bouguessa M, Dumoulin B, Wang S (2008) Identifying authoritative actors in question-answering forums: the case of Yahoo! answers. In: Proceedings of KDD, pp 866–874

  3. Burges CJC (2010) From RankNet to LambdaRank to LambdaMART: an overview. Microsoft research technical report, MSR-TR-2010-82

  4. Chang S, Pal A (2013) Routing questions for collaborative answering in community question answering. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM ASONAM, pp 494–501

  5. Choy M, Lee J-G, Gweon G, Kim D (2014) Glaucus: exploiting the wisdom of crowds for location-based queries in mobile environments. In: Proceedings of ICWSM, pp 61–70

  6. Diaz F, Metzler D, Amer-Yahia S (2010) Relevance and ranking in online dating systems. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGIR, pp 66–73

  7. Dror G, Koren Y, Maarek Y, Szpektor I (2011) I want to answer; who has a question? Yahoo! answers recommender system. In: Proceedings of KDD, pp 1109–1117

  8. Gkotsis G, Stepanyan K, Pedrinaci C, Domingue J, Liakata M (2014) It’s all in the content: state of the art best answer prediction based on discretisation of shallow linguistic features. In: Proceedings of ACM WebSci, pp 202–210

  9. Hong W, Li L, Li T, Pan W (2013) iHR: an online recruiting system for Xiamen Talent Service Center. In: Proceedings of KDD, pp 1177–1185

  10. Ji Z, Wang B (2013) Learning to rank for question routing in community question answering. In: Proceedings of ACM CIKM, pp 2363–2368

  11. Jurczyk P, Agichtein E (2007) Discovering authorities in question answer communities by using link analysis. In: Proceedings of ACM CIKM, pp 919–922

  12. Kutty S, Nayak R, Chen L (2014) A people-to-people matching system using graph mining techniques. World Wide Web J 17:311–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Li L, Li T (2012) MEET: a generalized framework for reciprocal recommendation systems. In: Proceedings of ACM CIKM, pp 35–44

  14. Pizzato L, Rej T, Chung T, Koprinska I, Kay J (2010) RECON: a reciprocal recommender for online dating. In: Proceedings of ACM recommender systems, pp 207–214

  15. Pizzato L, Rej T, Yacef K, Koprinska I, Kay J (2011) Finding someone you will like and who won’t reject you. In: Proceedings of international conference on user modeling, adaption and personalization (UMAP), pp 269–280

  16. Riahi F, Zolaktaf Z, Shafiei S, Milios E (2012) Finding expert users in community question answering. In: WWW 2012 companion (CQA workshop), pp 791–798

  17. Shi Y, Karatzoglou A, Baltrunas L, Larson M, Oliver N, Hanjalic A (2012) CLiMF: learning to maximize reciprocal rank with collaborative less-is-more filtering. In: Proceedings of ACM RecSys, pp 139–146

  18. Tian Q, Zhang P, Li B (2013) Towards predicting the best answers in community-based question-answering services. In: Proceedings of ICWSM, pp 725–728

  19. Tong H, Faloutsos C, Pan J-Y (2006) Fast random walk with restart and its applications. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICDM, pp 613–622

  20. Xia P, Jiang H, Wang X, Chen C, Liu B (2014) Predicting user replying behavior on a large online dating site. In: Proceedings of ICWSM, pp 545–554

  21. Xia P, Liu B, Sun Y, Chen C (2015) Reciprocal recommendation system for online dating. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM ASONAM, pp 234–241

  22. Yang B, Manandhar S (2014) Tag-based expert recommendation in community question answering. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM ASONAM, pp 960–963

  23. Zhao K, Wang X, Yu M, Gao B (2014) User recommendations in reciprocal and bipartite social networks-an online dating case study. IEEE Intell. Syst. 29(2):27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhao Z, Wei F, Zhou M, Ng W (2015) Cold-start expert finding in community question answering via graph regularization. In: Proceedings of DASFAA, pp 21–38

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was sponsored by Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) of Taiwan under Grant 107-2636-E-006-002, 106-3114-E-006-002, 107-2218-E-006-040, and 106-2628-E-006-005-MY3, and, and also by Academia Sinica under grant AS-107-TP-A05. This work is also a industrial collaboration project with Codementor, and we sincerely thank for the technical support from the data science team of Codementor.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cheng-Te Li.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, CT. Mentor-spotting: recommending expert mentors to mentees for live trouble-shooting in Codementor. Knowl Inf Syst 61, 799–820 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-018-1298-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-018-1298-3

Keywords

Navigation