Understanding video propagation in online social networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent statistics suggest that online social network (OSN) users regularly share video contents from video sharing sites (VSSes), and a significant amount of views of VSSes are indeed from OSN users nowadays. By crawling and comparing the statistics of same videos shared in both RenRen (the largest Facebook-like OSN in China) and Youku (the largest Youtube-like VSS in China), we find that the huge and distinguished video requests from OSNs have substantially changed the workload of VSSes. In particular, OSNs amplify the skewness of video popularity so largely that about 0.31% most popular videos account for 80% of total views. Another interesting phenomenon is that many popular videos in VSSes may not receive many requests in OSNs. To further understand these findings, we track the propagation process of videos shared in RenRen since their introduction to this OSN, and analyze the effect of potential parameters to such process, including the number of initiators (users who bring the video to the OSN directly from a VSS), branching factor (the number of users who watch the friend's shared video), and share rate (the probability that the viewers of a video will further share this video). Beyond our expectation, none of these factors determine a video's popularity in an OSN. Instead, it shows great randomness for the number of a video's potential requests when it is shared to an OSN. By modifying the basic Galton-Watson stochastic branching process, we develop a simple yet effective model to simulate the video propagation process in an OSN. Simulation results show that it can well capture the randomness of a video's popularity and the skewed video popularity distribution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".