Prediction of User’s Trustworthiness in Web-based Social Networks via Text Mining
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Social networks, users need a proper estimation of trust in others to be able to initialize reliable relationships. Some trust evaluation mechanisms have been offered, which use direct ratings to calculate or propagate trust values. However, in some web-based social networks where users only have binary relationships, there is no direct rating available. Therefore, a new method is required to infer trust values in these networks. To bridge this gap, this paper aims to propose a new method which takes advantage of user similarity to predict trust values without any need for direct ratings. In this approach, which is based on socio psychological studies, user similarity is calculated from the profile information and the texts shared by the users via text-mining techniques. Applying Ziegler ratios to our approach revealed that users are more than 50% more similar to their trusted agents than to arbitrary peers, which proves the validity of the original idea of the study about inferring trust from language similarity. In addition, comparing the real assigned ratings, gathered directly from users, with the experimental results indicated that the predicted trust values are sufficiently acceptable (with a precision of 61%). We have also studied the benefits of using context in inferring trust. In this regard, the analysis revealed that the precision of the predictions can be improved up to 72%. Besides the application of this approach in web-based social networks, the proposed technique can also be of much help in any direct rating mechanism to evaluate the correctness of trust values assigned by users, and increases the robustness of trust and reputation mechanisms against possible security threats.
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 | 0.001 | 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".