Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Addrian Fernandez

dblp:166/5222 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 100%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Web and social media mining · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering › controlled experiment › online controlled experiments
a/b testing
0.212015
From Infrastructure to Culture: A/B Testing Challenges in Large Scale Social Networks · KDD 2015
Web and social media mining
social network analysis
0.112015
From Infrastructure to Culture: A/B Testing Challenges in Large Scale Social Networks · KDD 2015

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

controlled experiment · 0.4a/b testing · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 From Infrastructure to Culture: A/B Testing Challenges in Large Scale Social Networks
abstract
A/B testing, also known as bucket testing, split testing, or controlled experiment, is a standard way to evaluate user engagement or satisfaction from a new service, feature, or product. It is widely used among online websites, including social network sites such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter to make data-driven decisions. At LinkedIn, we have seen tremendous growth of controlled experiments over time, with now over 400 concurrent experiments running per day. General A/B testing frameworks and methodologies, including challenges and pitfalls, have been discussed extensively in several previous KDD work [7, 8, 9, 10]. In this paper, we describe in depth the experimentation platform we have built at LinkedIn and the challenges that arise particularly when running A/B tests at large scale in a social network setting. We start with an introduction of the experimentation platform and how it is built to handle each step of the A/B testing process at LinkedIn, from designing and deploying experiments to analyzing them. It is then followed by discussions on several more sophisticated A/B testing scenarios, such as running offline experiments and addressing the network effect, where one user's action can influence that of another. Lastly, we talk about features and processes that are crucial for building a strong experimentation culture.
Ya Xu, Nanyu Chen, Addrian Fernandez, Omar Sinno, Anmol Bhasin
KDD3