Comparison of Similarity Methods on New Student Admission Chatbots Using Retrieval-Based Concepts

Arif Mudi Priyatno; M. Riko Anshori Prasetya; Putri Cholidhazia; Resy Kumala Sari

doi:10.69693/jesa.v1i1.2

Authors

Arif Mudi Priyatno University of Pahlawan Tuanku Tambusai
M. Riko Anshori Prasetya Department of Information Systems, University of Sari Mulia, Kalimantan Selatan, Indonesia
Putri Cholidhazia Department of Informatic Engineering, University of Al-Azhar Indonesia, Indonesia
Resy Kumala Sari Department Industrial Enginering and Management, Yuan Ze University, Taiwan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69693/jesa.v1i1.2

Keywords:

Similarity Methods, New Student Admission, Chatbot, Retrieval-Based Concepts, Cosine, Dice

Abstract

A college's students are an essential component. The college always opens registration for new students each year. Every year, more than 1,000 prospective new students register. Because of this, the new student admissions committee is constantly overwhelmed when responding to campus-related questions. As a result, developing a chatbot to assist new students is necessary. The best similarity method is needed for the development of a chatbot using a retrieval-model approach. The New Student Admission Chatbot and the Similarity Method are compared in this study using the Retrieval-Based Concept. The cosine, Jaccard, dice, euclidean, Manhattan, Canberra, and Chebyshev similarity methods are compared. In the context of Universitas Pahlawan Tuanku Tambusai, the data used are information about new students as well as accreditation for study program. There are 41 pieces of information used. Labels and information make up data. According to the test results, the dice and cosine similarity methods are the most effective. On all tested thresholds, dice and cosine similarity achieved an f1-score above 80%. Recall produces extremely optimal results, including 100%.Over 75% of the time, good results are reliably achieved. This demonstrates that the retrieval-model concept can be applied

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

M. R. A. Prasetya and A. M. Priyatno, “Dice Similarity and TF-IDF for New Student Admissions Chatbot,” RIGGS J. Artif. Intell. Digit. Bus., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13–18, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.31004/riggs.v1i1.5.

A. Elcholiqi and A. Musdholifah, “Chatbot in Bahasa Indonesia using NLP to Provide Banking Information,” IJCCS (Indonesian J. Comput. Cybern. Syst., vol. 14, no. 1, p. 91, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.22146/ijccs.41289.

G. A. Santos, G. G. de Andrade, G. R. S. Silva, F. C. M. Duarte, J. P. J. Da Costa, and R. T. de Sousa, “A Conversation-Driven Approach for Chatbot Management,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 8474–8486, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3143323.

M. Adam, M. Wessel, and A. Benlian, “AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance,” Electron. Mark., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 427–445, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s12525-020-00414-7.

M. D. Illescas-Manzano, N. V. López, N. A. González, and C. C. Rodríguez, “Implementation of chatbot in online commerce, and open innovation,” J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex., vol. 7, no. 2, p. 125, May 2021, doi: 10.3390/joitmc7020125.

S. Han and M. K. Lee, “FAQ chatbot and inclusive learning in massive open online courses,” Comput. Educ., vol. 179, p. 104395, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104395.

P. Amiri and E. Karahanna, “Chatbot use cases in the Covid-19 public health response,” J. Am. Med. Informatics Assoc., vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 1000–1010, 2022, doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocac014.

R. Agarwal and M. Wadhwa, “Review of State-of-the-Art Design Techniques for Chatbots,” SN Comput. Sci., vol. 1, no. 5, p. 246, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s42979-020-00255-3.

A. Soufyane, B. A. Abdelhakim, and M. Ben Ahmed, “An intelligent chatbot using NLP and TF-IDF algorithm for text understanding applied to the medical field,” in Advances in Science, Technology and Innovation, Springer, 2021, pp. 3–10. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-53440-0_1.

N. P. Ririanti and A. Purwinarko, “Implementation of Support Vector Machine Algorithm with Correlation-Based Feature Selection and Term Frequency Inverse Document Frequency for Sentiment Analysis Review Hotel,” Sci. J. Informatics, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 297–303, 2021, doi: 10.15294/sji.v8i2.29992.

N. S. Mohd Nafis and S. Awang, “An Enhanced Hybrid Feature Selection Technique Using Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and Support Vector Machine-Recursive Feature Elimination for Sentiment Classification,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, no. Ml, pp. 52177–52192, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3069001.

M. Z. Naeem, F. Rustam, A. Mehmood, Mui-zzud-din, I. Ashraf, and G. S. Choi, “Classification of movie reviews using term frequency-inverse document frequency and optimized machine learning algorithms,” PeerJ Comput. Sci., vol. 8, p. e914, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.7717/PEERJ-CS.914.

D. Ifenthaler, “Measures of Similarity,” in Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning, Boston, MA: Springer US, 2012, pp. 2147–2150. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_503.

R. Singh and S. Singh, “Text Similarity Measures in News Articles by Vector Space Model Using NLP,” J. Inst. Eng. Ser. B, vol. 102, no. 2, pp. 329–338, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s40031-020-00501-5.

H. Khojamli and J. Razmara, “Survey of similarity functions on neighborhood-based collaborative filtering,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 185, no. March, p. 115482, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115482.

S. Bag, S. K. Kumar, and M. K. Tiwari, “An efficient recommendation generation using relevant Jaccard similarity,” Inf. Sci. (Ny)., vol. 483, pp. 53–64, May 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2019.01.023.

S. Varma, S. Shivam, A. Thumu, A. Bhushanam, and D. Sarkar, “Jaccard Based Similarity Index in Graphs: A Multi-Hop Approach,” in 2022 IEEE Delhi Section Conference (DELCON), Feb. 2022, pp. 1–4. doi: 10.1109/DELCON54057.2022.9753316.

A. Bahrul Khoir, H. Qodim, B. Busro, and A. Rialdy Atmadja, “Implementation of rabin-karp algorithm to determine the similarity of synoptic gospels,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1175, no. 1, p. 012120, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1175/1/012120.

R. Suwanda, Z. Syahputra, and E. M. Zamzami, “Analysis of Euclidean Distance and Manhattan Distance in the K-Means Algorithm for Variations Number of Centroid K,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1566, no. 1, p. 012058, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1566/1/012058.

S. Liaquat, M. F. Zia, O. Saleem, Z. Asif, and M. Benbouzid, “Performance analysis of distance metrics on the exploitation properties and convergence behaviour of the conventional firefly algorithm,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 126, p. 109255, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2022.109255.

M. Faisal, E. M. Zamzami, and Sutarman, “Comparative Analysis of Inter-Centroid K-Means Performance using Euclidean Distance, Canberra Distance and Manhattan Distance,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1566, no. 1, p. 012112, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1566/1/012112.

A. M. Priyatno, “Spammer Detection Based on Account, Tweet, and Community Activity on Twitter,” J. Ilmu Komput. dan Inf., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 97–107, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.21609/jiki.v13i2.871.

A. M. Priyatno, M. M. Muttaqi, F. Syuhada, and A. Z. Arifin, “Deteksi bot spammer twitter berbasis time interval entropy dan global vectors for word representations tweet’s hashtag,” Regist. J. Ilm. Teknol. Sist. Inf., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 37–46, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.26594/register.v5i1.1382.

A. M. Priyatno, F. M. Putra, P. Cholidhazia, and L. Ningsih, “Combination of extraction features based on texture and colour feature for beef and pork classification,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1563, no. 1, p. 012007, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1563/1/012007.