사회연결망 분석을 활용한 연관규칙 확장기법 (Extension Method of Association Rules Using Social Network Analysis)
-
- 지능정보연구
- /
- 제23권4호
- /
- pp.111-126
- /
- 2017
연관 상품 추천은 수많은 상품을 다루는 온라인 상거래에서 소비자의 상품 탐색 시간을 줄여주며 판매자의 매출 증대에 크게 기여한다. 이는 주문과 같은 거래의 빈도를 기반으로 생성되므로, 통계적으로 판매 확률이 높은 상품을 효과적으로 선별할 수 있다. 하지만, 판매 가능성이 높은 경우라도 신상품처럼 판매 초기에 거래 건수가 충분하지 않은 상품은 추천에서 누락될 수 있다. 연관 추천에서 누락된 상품은 이로 인해 노출 기회를 잃게 되고, 이는 거래 건수 감소로 이어져, 또 다시 추천 기회를 잃는 악순환을 겪을 수도 한다. 따라서, 충분한 거래 건수가 쌓이기 전까지 초기 매출은 일정 기간 동안 정체되는 현상을 보이는데, 의류 등과 같이 유행에 민감하거나 계절 변화에 영향을 많이 받는 상품은 이로 인해 매출에 큰 타격을 입을 수도 있다. 본 연구는 이와 같이 거래 초기의 낮은 거래 빈도로 인해 잘 드러나지 않는 상품 간의 잠재적인 연관성을 찾아 추천 기회를 확보할 수 있도록 연관 규칙을 확장하기 위한 목적으로 수행되었다. 두 상품 간에 직접적인 연관성이 나타나지 않더라도 다른 상품을 매개로 두 상품 간의 잠재적 연관성을 예측할 수 있을 것이며, 이런 연관성은 주문에서 나타나는 상품 간 상호작용으로 표현될 수 있으므로, 사회연결망 분석을 활용한 분석을 시도하였다. 사회연결망 분석기법을 통해 각 상품의 속성과 두 상품 간 경로의 특성을 추출하고 회귀분석을 실시하여, 두 상품 간 경로의 최단 거리 및 경로의 개수, 각 상품이 얼마나 많은 상품과 연관성을 갖는지, 두 상품의 분류 카테고리가 어느 정도 일치하는지가 두 상품 간의 잠재적 연관성에 미친다는 것을 확인하였다. 모형의 성능을 평가하기 위해, 일정 기간의 주문 데이터로부터 연결망을 구성하고, 이후 10일 간 생성될 상품 간 연관성을 예측하는 실험을 진행하였다. 실험 결과는 모형을 적용하지 않는 경우보다 제안 모형을 활용할 때 훨씬 많은 연관성을 찾을 수 있음을 보여준다.
오늘날 이동통신은 급증하는 데이터 수요에 대응하기 위해서 주로 속도 향상에 초점을 맞추어 발전해 왔다. 그리고 5G 시대가 시작되면서 IoT, V2X, 로봇, 인공지능, 증강 가상현실, 스마트시티 등을 비롯하여 다양한 서비스를 고객들에게 제공하기위한 노력들이 진행되고 있고 이는 우리의 삶의 터전과 산업 전반에 대한 환경을 바꿀 것으로 예상되고 되고 있다. 이러한 서비스를 제공하기위해서 고속 데이터 속도 외에도, 실시간 서비스를 위한 지연 감소 그리고 신뢰도 등이 매우 중요한데 5G에서는 최대 속도 20Gbps, 지연 1ms, 연결 기기 106/㎢를 제공함으로써 서비스 제공할 수 있는 기반을 마련하였다. 하지만 5G는 고주파 대역인 3.5Ghz, 28Ghz의 높은 주파수를 사용함으로써 높은 직진성의 빠른 속도를 제공할 수 있으나, 짧은 파장을 가지고 있어 도달할 수 있는 거리가 짧고, 회절 각도가 작아서 건물 등을 투과하지 못해 실내 이용에서 제약이 따른다. 따라서 기존의 통신망으로 이러한 제약을 벗어나기가 어렵고, 기반 구조인 중앙 집중식 SDN 또한 많은 노드와의 통신으로 인해 처리 능력에 과도한 부하가 발생하기 때문에 지연에 민감한 서비스 제공에 어려움이 있다. 그래서 자율 주행 중 긴급 상황이 발생할 경우 사용 가능한 지연 관련 트리 구조의 제어 기능이 필요하다. 이러한 시나리오에서 차량 내 정보를 처리하는 네트워크 아키텍처는 지연의 주요 변수이다. 일반적인 중앙 집중 구조의 SDN에서는 원하는 지연 수준을 충족하기가 어렵기 때문에 정보 처리를 위한 SDN의 최적 크기에 대한 연구가 이루어져야 한다. 그러므로 SDN이 일정 규모로 분리하여 새로운 형태의 망을 구성 해야하며 이러한 새로운 형태의 망 구조는 동적으로 변하는 트래픽에 효율적으로 대응하고 높은 품질의 유연성 있는 서비스를 제공할 수 있다. 이러한 SDN 구조 망에서 정보의 변경 주기, RTD(Round Trip Delay), SDN의 데이터 처리 시간은 지연과 매우 밀접한 상관관계를 가진다. 이 중 RDT는 속도는 충분하고 지연은 1ms 이하이기에 유의미한 영향을 주는 요인은 아니지만 정보 변경 주기와 SDN의 데이터 처리 시간은 지연에 크게 영향을 주는 요인이다. 특히, 5G의 다양한 응용분야 중에서 지연과 신뢰도가 가장 중요한 분야인 지능형 교통 시스템과 연계된 자율주행 환경의 응급상황에서는 정보 전송은 매우 짧은 시간 안에 전송 및 처리돼야 하는 상황이기때문에 지연이라는 요인이 매우 민감하게 작용하는 조건의 대표적인 사례라고 볼 수 있다. 본 논문에서는 자율 주행 시 응급상황에서 SDN 아키텍처를 연구하고, 정보 흐름(셀 반경, 차량의 속도 및 SDN의 데이터 처리 시간의 변화)에 따라 차량이 관련정보를 요청해야 할 셀 계층과의 상관관계에 대하여 시뮬레이션을 통하여 분석을 진행하였다.
The objective of this research is to test the feasibility of developing a statewide truck traffic forecasting methodology for Wisconsin by using Origin-Destination surveys, traffic counts, classification counts, and other data that are routinely collected by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT). Development of a feasible model will permit estimation of future truck traffic for every major link in the network. This will provide the basis for improved estimation of future pavement deterioration. Pavement damage rises exponentially as axle weight increases, and trucks are responsible for most of the traffic-induced damage to pavement. Consequently, forecasts of truck traffic are critical to pavement management systems. The pavement Management Decision Supporting System (PMDSS) prepared by WisDOT in May 1990 combines pavement inventory and performance data with a knowledge base consisting of rules for evaluation, problem identification and rehabilitation recommendation. Without a r.easonable truck traffic forecasting methodology, PMDSS is not able to project pavement performance trends in order to make assessment and recommendations in the future years. However, none of WisDOT's existing forecasting methodologies has been designed specifically for predicting truck movements on a statewide highway network. For this research, the Origin-Destination survey data avaiiable from WisDOT, including two stateline areas, one county, and five cities, are analyzed and the zone-to'||'&'||'not;zone truck trip tables are developed. The resulting Origin-Destination Trip Length Frequency (00 TLF) distributions by trip type are applied to the Gravity Model (GM) for comparison with comparable TLFs from the GM. The gravity model is calibrated to obtain friction factor curves for the three trip types, Internal-Internal (I-I), Internal-External (I-E), and External-External (E-E). ~oth "macro-scale" calibration and "micro-scale" calibration are performed. The comparison of the statewide GM TLF with the 00 TLF for the macro-scale calibration does not provide suitable results because the available 00 survey data do not represent an unbiased sample of statewide truck trips. For the "micro-scale" calibration, "partial" GM trip tables that correspond to the 00 survey trip tables are extracted from the full statewide GM trip table. These "partial" GM trip tables are then merged and a partial GM TLF is created. The GM friction factor curves are adjusted until the partial GM TLF matches the 00 TLF. Three friction factor curves, one for each trip type, resulting from the micro-scale calibration produce a reasonable GM truck trip model. A key methodological issue for GM. calibration involves the use of multiple friction factor curves versus a single friction factor curve for each trip type in order to estimate truck trips with reasonable accuracy. A single friction factor curve for each of the three trip types was found to reproduce the 00 TLFs from the calibration data base. Given the very limited trip generation data available for this research, additional refinement of the gravity model using multiple mction factor curves for each trip type was not warranted. In the traditional urban transportation planning studies, the zonal trip productions and attractions and region-wide OD TLFs are available. However, for this research, the information available for the development .of the GM model is limited to Ground Counts (GC) and a limited set ofOD TLFs. The GM is calibrated using the limited OD data, but the OD data are not adequate to obtain good estimates of truck trip productions and attractions .. Consequently, zonal productions and attractions are estimated using zonal population as a first approximation. Then, Selected Link based (SELINK) analyses are used to adjust the productions and attractions and possibly recalibrate the GM. The SELINK adjustment process involves identifying the origins and destinations of all truck trips that are assigned to a specified "selected link" as the result of a standard traffic assignment. A link adjustment factor is computed as the ratio of the actual volume for the link (ground count) to the total assigned volume. This link adjustment factor is then applied to all of the origin and destination zones of the trips using that "selected link". Selected link based analyses are conducted by using both 16 selected links and 32 selected links. The result of SELINK analysis by u~ing 32 selected links provides the least %RMSE in the screenline volume analysis. In addition, the stability of the GM truck estimating model is preserved by using 32 selected links with three SELINK adjustments, that is, the GM remains calibrated despite substantial changes in the input productions and attractions. The coverage of zones provided by 32 selected links is satisfactory. Increasing the number of repetitions beyond four is not reasonable because the stability of GM model in reproducing the OD TLF reaches its limits. The total volume of truck traffic captured by 32 selected links is 107% of total trip productions. But more importantly, ~ELINK adjustment factors for all of the zones can be computed. Evaluation of the travel demand model resulting from the SELINK adjustments is conducted by using screenline volume analysis, functional class and route specific volume analysis, area specific volume analysis, production and attraction analysis, and Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) analysis. Screenline volume analysis by using four screenlines with 28 check points are used for evaluation of the adequacy of the overall model. The total trucks crossing the screenlines are compared to the ground count totals. L V/GC ratios of 0.958 by using 32 selected links and 1.001 by using 16 selected links are obtained. The %RM:SE for the four screenlines is inversely proportional to the average ground count totals by screenline .. The magnitude of %RM:SE for the four screenlines resulting from the fourth and last GM run by using 32 and 16 selected links is 22% and 31 % respectively. These results are similar to the overall %RMSE achieved for the 32 and 16 selected links themselves of 19% and 33% respectively. This implies that the SELINICanalysis results are reasonable for all sections of the state.Functional class and route specific volume analysis is possible by using the available 154 classification count check points. The truck traffic crossing the Interstate highways (ISH) with 37 check points, the US highways (USH) with 50 check points, and the State highways (STH) with 67 check points is compared to the actual ground count totals. The magnitude of the overall link volume to ground count ratio by route does not provide any specific pattern of over or underestimate. However, the %R11SE for the ISH shows the least value while that for the STH shows the largest value. This pattern is consistent with the screenline analysis and the overall relationship between %RMSE and ground count volume groups. Area specific volume analysis provides another broad statewide measure of the performance of the overall model. The truck traffic in the North area with 26 check points, the West area with 36 check points, the East area with 29 check points, and the South area with 64 check points are compared to the actual ground count totals. The four areas show similar results. No specific patterns in the L V/GC ratio by area are found. In addition, the %RMSE is computed for each of the four areas. The %RMSEs for the North, West, East, and South areas are 92%, 49%, 27%, and 35% respectively, whereas, the average ground counts are 481, 1383, 1532, and 3154 respectively. As for the screenline and volume range analyses, the %RMSE is inversely related to average link volume. 'The SELINK adjustments of productions and attractions resulted in a very substantial reduction in the total in-state zonal productions and attractions. The initial in-state zonal trip generation model can now be revised with a new trip production's trip rate (total adjusted productions/total population) and a new trip attraction's trip rate. Revised zonal production and attraction adjustment factors can then be developed that only reflect the impact of the SELINK adjustments that cause mcreases or , decreases from the revised zonal estimate of productions and attractions. Analysis of the revised production adjustment factors is conducted by plotting the factors on the state map. The east area of the state including the counties of Brown, Outagamie, Shawano, Wmnebago, Fond du Lac, Marathon shows comparatively large values of the revised adjustment factors. Overall, both small and large values of the revised adjustment factors are scattered around Wisconsin. This suggests that more independent variables beyond just 226; population are needed for the development of the heavy truck trip generation model. More independent variables including zonal employment data (office employees and manufacturing employees) by industry type, zonal private trucks 226; owned and zonal income data which are not available currently should be considered. A plot of frequency distribution of the in-state zones as a function of the revised production and attraction adjustment factors shows the overall " adjustment resulting from the SELINK analysis process. Overall, the revised SELINK adjustments show that the productions for many zones are reduced by, a factor of 0.5 to 0.8 while the productions for ~ relatively few zones are increased by factors from 1.1 to 4 with most of the factors in the 3.0 range. No obvious explanation for the frequency distribution could be found. The revised SELINK adjustments overall appear to be reasonable. The heavy truck VMT analysis is conducted by comparing the 1990 heavy truck VMT that is forecasted by the GM truck forecasting model, 2.975 billions, with the WisDOT computed data. This gives an estimate that is 18.3% less than the WisDOT computation of 3.642 billions of VMT. The WisDOT estimates are based on the sampling the link volumes for USH, 8TH, and CTH. This implies potential error in sampling the average link volume. The WisDOT estimate of heavy truck VMT cannot be tabulated by the three trip types, I-I, I-E ('||'&'||'pound;-I), and E-E. In contrast, the GM forecasting model shows that the proportion ofE-E VMT out of total VMT is 21.24%. In addition, tabulation of heavy truck VMT by route functional class shows that the proportion of truck traffic traversing the freeways and expressways is 76.5%. Only 14.1% of total freeway truck traffic is I-I trips, while 80% of total collector truck traffic is I-I trips. This implies that freeways are traversed mainly by I-E and E-E truck traffic while collectors are used mainly by I-I truck traffic. Other tabulations such as average heavy truck speed by trip type, average travel distance by trip type and the VMT distribution by trip type, route functional class and travel speed are useful information for highway planners to understand the characteristics of statewide heavy truck trip patternS. Heavy truck volumes for the target year 2010 are forecasted by using the GM truck forecasting model. Four scenarios are used. Fo~ better forecasting, ground count- based segment adjustment factors are developed and applied. ISH 90 '||'&'||' 94 and USH 41 are used as example routes. The forecasting results by using the ground count-based segment adjustment factors are satisfactory for long range planning purposes, but additional ground counts would be useful for USH 41. Sensitivity analysis provides estimates of the impacts of the alternative growth rates including information about changes in the trip types using key routes. The network'||'&'||'not;based GMcan easily model scenarios with different rates of growth in rural versus . . urban areas, small versus large cities, and in-state zones versus external stations. cities, and in-state zones versus external stations.