Mixed-Membership Stochastic Block-Models for Transactional Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transactional network data can be thought of as a list of one-to-many communications (e.g., email) between nodes in a social network. Most social network models convert this type of data into binary relations between pairs of nodes. We develop a latent mixed membership model capable of modeling richer forms of transactional network data, including relations between more than two nodes. The model can cluster nodes and predict transactions. The block-model nature of the model implies that groups can be characterized in very general ways. This flexible notion of group structure enables discovery of rich structure in transactional networks. Estimation and inference are accomplished via a variational EM algorithm. Simulations indicate that the learning algorithm can recover the correct generative model. Interesting structure is discovered in the Enron email dataset and another dataset extracted from the Reddit website. Analysis of the Reddit data is facilitated by a novel performance measure for comparing two soft clusterings. The new model is superior at discovering mixed membership in groups and in predicting transactions.
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) | 0.002 | 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".