MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010124625 · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.07.055

Community Evolution Mining in Dynamic Social Networks

2011· article· en· W2010124625 on OpenAlexaff
Mansoureh Takaffoli, Farzad Sangi, Justin Fagnan, Osmar R. Zai͏̈ane

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCommunity structureMatching (statistics)Data scienceDynamic network analysisSocial network analysisData miningComplex networkGraphSocial network (sociolinguistics)Series (stratigraphy)Theoretical computer scienceSocial mediaWorld Wide WebMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data that encompasses relationships is represented by a graph of interconnected nodes. Social network analysis is the study of such graphs which examines questions related to structures and patterns that can lead to the understanding of the data and predicting the trends of social networks. Static analysis, where the time of interaction is not considered (i.e., the network is frozen in time), misses the opportunity to capture the evolutionary patterns in dynamic networks. Specifically, detecting the community evolutions, the community structures that changes in time, provides insight into the underlying behaviour of the network. Recently, a number of researchers have started focusing on identifying critical events that characterize the evolution of communities in dynamic scenarios. In this paper, we present a framework for modeling and detecting community evolution in social networks, where a series of significant events is defined for each community. A community matching algorithm is also proposed to effciently identify and track similar communities over time. We also define the concept of meta community which is a series of similar communities captured in different timeframes and detected by our matching algorithm. We illustrate the capabilities and potential of our framework by applying it to two real datasets. Furthermore, the events detected by the framework is supplemented by extraction and investigation of the topics discovered for each community.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations99
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia - Social and Behavioral SciencesSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207