Review Comment:
This manuscript was submitted as 'full paper' and should be reviewed along the usual dimensions for research contributions which include (1) originality, (2) significance of the results, and (3) quality of writing.
The paper proposes a graph-based data model for Multimedia Social Networks, namely social networks that enable users to share multimedia content. A case study from the cultural heritage domain is used to demonstrate and evaluate the proposed model.
Although it presents some nice ideas, the paper has, in my opinion, several flaws, the most important of which are that the proposed model is not properly motivated, is not clearly presented and is not sufficiently evaluated.
Regarding its motivation, the paper does not justify the definition of a new graph-based model instead of an ontology, which is the most common data modelling approach in this field. Ontology languages provide features such as unique URIs and inference support, which the proposed model does not seem to support. I would expect the authors to explain why these features may not be important, or how they can be supported by the proposed model, or what other features, which are not supported by ontologies but are supported by the proposed model, may be more important in this domain.
Regarding the presentation of the model, many of the design choices are either not clearly justified or not well explained. For example, it is not clear at all how weights are useful and how they are actually used. It is also unclear how the metrics in Section 3.2 are relevant, and how they are computed. The case study does not make things clearer as it does not use any weights or any of these metrics. On the other hand, it adds more confusion, as it discusses some low-level multimedia features, which is not clear at all if and how they can be modelled by the proposed model.
The evaluation is also very unclear. It is not clear at all what is evaluated and how. The figures do not add any clarity as their labels are very generic and the Y-axes are not labelled. A standard evaluation approach for data modelling would include aspects as accuracy, completeness, clarity, etc., which are not used at all in this paper.
For all these reasons, but also because cultural heritage is only used as a case study and is not the main focus of this research, I recommend the rejection of the paper.
|