MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157372716 · doi:10.1109/icdcsw.2007.82

Towards a Gravity-Based Trust Model for Social Networking Systems

2007· article· en· W2157372716 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityComputer scienceSocial network (sociolinguistics)Focus (optics)Trust management (information system)Scheme (mathematics)The InternetComputationSocial trustComputational trustWorld Wide WebSocial mediaData scienceComputer securitySocial capitalSociologyAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web-based social networks are emerging as the top applications on the Internet. With this immense popularity, many of the shortcomings of the current social network deployments are also coming to light. One of the glaring problems with existing web-based social networks is trust management. In this paper, we focus on trust modeling in social networks. Another allied issue that is not considered here is using trust in managing the activities within the social network. We introduce a gravity-based model for estimating trust. We present the complete model along with the trust computation algorithms. We present initial results from a simulation study that investigates the feasibility of the proposed scheme.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Quick stats

Citations56
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207