Finding out whether a word occurs significantly more often in one text or corpus than in another is an important question in analysing corpora. As noted by Kilgarriff (Language is never, ever, ever, random, Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory , 2005; 1(2): 263–76.), the use of the χ2 and log-likelihood ratio tests is problematic in this context, as they are based on the assumption that all samples are statistically independent of each other. However, words within a text are not independent. As pointed out in Kilgarriff (Comparing corpora, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics , 2001; 6(1): 1–37) and Paquot and Bestgen (Distinctive words in academic writing: a comparison of three statistical tests for keyword extraction. In Jucker, A., Schreier, D., and Hundt, M. (eds), Corpora: Pragmatics and Discourse . Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2009, pp. 247–69), it is possible to represent the data differently and employ other tests, such that we assume independence at the level of texts rather than individual words. This allows us to account for the distribution of words within a corpus. In this article we compare the significance estimates of various statistical tests in a controlled resampling experiment and in a practical setting, studying differences between texts produced by male and female fiction writers in the British National Corpus. We find that the choice of the test, and hence data representation, matters. We conclude that significance testing can be used to find consequential differences between corpora, but that assuming independence between all words may lead to overestimating the significance of the observed differences, especially for poorly dispersed words. We recommend the use of the t-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, or bootstrap test for comparing word frequencies across corpora.

E-recruitment recommendation systems recommend jobs to job seekers and job seekers to recruiters. The recommendations are generated based on the suitability of job seekers for positions and on job seekers’ and recruiters’ preferences. Therefore, e-recruitment recommendation systems may greatly impact people’s careers. Moreover, by affecting the hiring processes of the companies, e-recruitment recommendation systems play an important role in shaping the competitive edge of companies. Hence, it seems prudent to consider what (unique) challenges there are for recommendation systems in e-recruitment. Existing surveys on this topic discuss past studies from the algorithmic perspective, e.g., by categorizing them into collaborative filtering, content-based, and hybrid methods. This survey, instead, takes a complementary, challenge-based approach. We believe this is more practical for developers facing a concrete e-recruitment design task with a specific set of challenges, and also for researchers that look for impactful research projects in this domain. In this survey, we first identify the main challenges in the e-recruitment recommendation research. Next, we discuss how those challenges have been studied in the literature. Finally, we provide future research directions that we consider most promising in the e-recruitment recommendation domain.

Consider a large graph or network, and a user-provided set of query vertices between which the user wishes to explore relations. For example, a researcher may want to connect research papers in a citation network, an analyst may wish to connect organized crime suspects in a communication network, or an internet user may want to organize their bookmarks given their location in the world wide web. A natural way to do this is to connect the vertices in the form of a tree structure that is present in the graph. However, in sufficiently dense graphs, most such trees will be large or somehow trivial (e.g. involving high degree vertices) and thus not insightful. Extending previous research, we define and investigate the new problem of mining subjectively interesting trees connecting a set of query vertices in a graph, i.e., trees that are highly surprising to the specific user at hand. Using information theoretic principles, we formalize the notion of interestingness of such trees mathematically, taking in account certain prior beliefs the user has specified about the graph. A remaining problem is efficiently fitting a prior belief model. We show how this can be done for a large class of prior beliefs. Given a specified prior belief model, we then propose heuristic algorithms to find the best trees efficiently. An empirical validation of our methods on a large real graphs evaluates the different heuristics and validates the interestingness of the given trees.