When Social Influence Meets Item Inference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research issues and data mining techniques for product recommendation and viral marketing have been widely studied. Existing works on seed selection in social networks do not take into account the effect of product recommendations in e-commerce stores. In this paper, we investigate the seed selection problem for viral marketing that considers both effects of social influence and item inference (for product recommendation). We develop a new model, Social Item Graph (SIG), that captures both effects in the form of hyperedges. Accordingly, we formulate a seed selection problem, called Social Item Maximization Problem (SIMP), and prove the hardness of SIMP. We design an efficient algorithm with performance guarantee, called Hyperedge-Aware Greedy (HAG), for SIMP and develop a new index structure, called SIG-index, to accelerate the computation of diffusion process in HAG. Moreover, to construct realistic SIG models for SIMP, we develop a statistical inference based framework to learn the weights of hyperedges from data. Finally, we perform a comprehensive evaluation on our proposals with various baselines. Experimental result validates our ideas and demonstrates the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed model and algorithms over baselines.
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 | 0.014 | 0.126 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".