A New Model for Rating Users’ Profiles in Online Social Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Profiling users in Online Social Networks (OSNs) is of great benefit in multiple domains (e.g., marketing, sociology, and forensics). In this paper, we propose a new model for rating user’s profile (i.e., low, medium, high, and advanced) in an OSN community by embedding it into clusters located at predefined range of radius in a low-dimensional Cartesian space. The orthogonal coordinates of the profile are estimated using Principle Component Analysis (PCA) applied on a vector of metrics formulated as a set of attributes of interest (i.e., qualitative and quantitative) mined from the user’s profile to characterize his/her level of participation and behavior in the community. The experimentations are conducted on 3000 simulated profiles of three OSNs (Facebook, Twitter and Instagram) by embedding them in three cartesian spaces of three corresponding communities (Religion, Political and Lifestyle). The results show that we are able to estimate accurately the profile rates by reducing the vector of metrics to a low-dimensional space whittle down to 3-D space.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".