MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089201173 · doi:10.1145/2629530

Trust Prediction via Belief Propagation

2014· article· en· W2089201173 on OpenAlexaff
Richong Zhang, Yongyi Mao

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Information Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceBelief propagationGraphical modelFactor graphProbabilistic logicInferenceExploitMachine learningExpectation propagationArtificial intelligenceSolverPropagation of uncertaintyTheoretical computer scienceApproximate inferenceData miningAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prediction of trust relationships in social networks plays an important role in the analytics of the networks. Although various link prediction algorithms for general networks may be adapted for this purpose, the recent notion of “trust propagation” has been shown to effectively capture the trust-formation mechanisms and resulted in an effective prediction algorithm. This article builds on the concept of trust propagation and presents a probabilistic trust propagation model. Our model exploits the modern framework of probabilistic graphical models, more specifically, factor graphs. Under this model, the trust prediction problem can be formulated as a statistical inference problem and we derive the belief propagation algorithm as a solver for trust prediction. The model and algorithm are tested using datasets from Epinions and Ciao, by which performance advantages over the previous algorithms are demonstrated.

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)0.024
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Information SystemsSame topicAdvanced Graph Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207