MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2680117742 · doi:10.1109/tsipn.2017.2731053

Inferring Structural Characteristics of Networks With Strong and Weak Ties From Fixed-Choice Surveys

2017· preprint· en· W2680117742 on OpenAlexafffund
Naghmeh Momeni, Michael Rabbat

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Signal and Information Processing over Networks · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEstimatorEconometricsSocial network (sociolinguistics)Network topologyVariety (cybernetics)Degree distributionComputer scienceJackknife resamplingInterpersonal tiesClustering coefficientCluster analysisRespondentStatisticsMathematicsComplex network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowing the structure of an offline social network facilitates a variety of analyses, including studying the rate at which infectious diseases may spread and identifying a subset of actors to immunize in order to reduce, as much as possible, the rate of spread. Offline social network topologies are typically estimated by surveying actors and asking them to list their neighbors. While identifying close friends and family (i.e., strong ties) can typically be done reliably, listing all of one's acquaintances (i.e., weak ties) is subject to error due to respondent fatigue. This issue is commonly circumvented through the use of so-called “fixed choice” surveys where respondents are asked to name a fixed, small number of their weak ties (e.g., two or ten). Of course, the resulting crude observed network will omit many ties, and using this crude network to infer properties of the network, such as its degree distribution or clustering coefficient, will lead to biased estimates. This paper develops estimators, based on the method of moments, for a number of network characteristics including those related to the first and second moments of the degree distribution as well as the network size, using fixed-choice survey data. Experiments with simulated data illustrate that the proposed estimators perform well across a variety of network topologies and measurement scenarios, and the resulting estimates are significantly more accurate than those obtained directly using the crude observed network, which are commonly used in the literature. We also describe a variation of the Jackknife procedure that can be used to obtain an estimate of the estimator variance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Signal and Information Processing over NetworksSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207