Learning the Strength of the Factors Influencing User Behavior in Online Social Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As social networking is moving into the web, the study and exploitation of social correlation has emerged as a hot research topic. Most of these work consider binary social relations, called "friendships". However, online users tend to establish many friendships of varying degree of strength, e.g., relatives, friends, co-workers, and acquaintances. We argue that, due to their different degree of strength, different friend relationships will have greatly varying degrees of correlation and should be distinguished. Besides, social correlation is not the only factor driving user behavior. In this paper, we address the problem of learning the strength of the social correlation, user, item, and sparsity factors in online social networks. We propose a probabilistic model, Factor Weight Model, for learning these strengths which maximize the joint probability of the observed user behavior, i.e., actions on items. Different from existing methods, our model considers not only social correlation, but it also considers the other factors affecting user behavior. We have conducted experiments on four real life data sets from Epinions, Flixster, Flickr, and Digg. Our experiments prove the superiority of our model over a state-of-the-art method in terms of action prediction. We also analyze the contributions of the various factors for the prediction performance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".