An efficient method for link prediction in weighted multiplex networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A great variety of artificial and natural systems can be abstracted into a set of entities interacting with each other. Such abstractions can very well represent the underlying dynamics of the system when modeled as the network of vertices coupled by edges. Prediction of dynamics in these structures based on topological attribute or dependency relations is an important task. Link Prediction in such complex networks is regarded useful in almost all types of networks as it can be used to extract missing information, identify spurious interactions, and evaluate network evolving mechanisms. Various similarity and likelihood-based indices have been employed to infer different topological and relation-based information to form a link prediction algorithm. These algorithms, however, are too specific to the domain and do not encapsulate the generic nature of the real-world information. In most natural and engineered systems, the entities are linked with multiple types of associations and relations which play a factor in the dynamics of the network. It forms multiple subsystems or multiple layers of networked information. These networks are regarded as Multiplex Networks. METHODS: This work presents an approach for link prediction in Multiplex networks where the associations are learned from the multiple layers of networks for link prediction purposes. Most of the real-world networks are represented as weighted networks. Weight prediction coupled with Link Prediction can be of great use. Link scores are received using various similarity measures and used to predict weights. This work further proposes and testifies a strategy for weight prediction. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This work successfully proposes an algorithm for Weight Prediction using Link similarity measures on multiplex networks. The predicted weights show very less deviation from their actual weights. In comparison to other indices, the proposed method has a far low error rate and outperforms them concerning the metric performance NRMSE.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".