MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084273389 · doi:10.1016/j.csfx.2020.100031

Topic reading dynamics of the Chinese Sina-Microblog

2020· article· en· W3084273389 on OpenAlexafffund
Fulian Yin, Jiale Wu, Xueying Shao

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos Solitons & Fractals X · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMicrobloggingReading (process)Computer scienceSocial mediaSampling (signal processing)Dynamics (music)Key (lock)Set (abstract data type)World Wide WebTelecommunicationsComputer securityLinguisticsAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A topic in the Sina-Microblog consists of multiple Weibos sharing a specific set of key words. Therefore, a reader of a Weibo may be susceptible to other Weibos of the same topic, and hence may undergo multiple transitions between the susceptible and the exposed states before eventually becoming infectious. This complicates the reading dynamics that traditional epidemic susceptible-exposed-infectious compartmental models cannot capture, and requires a different setting than a single Weibo forwarding dynamics model. Here we formulate a topic reading dynamics model; introduce some summative indices characterizing the reading “outbreak” potential; derive analytic formulae to calculate these indices; and examine the sensitivity of these indices and the ability of prediction on model parameters and on sampling frequencies. We conduct some numerical experiments based on historical data of popular reading topics in the Chinese Sina-Microblog. In our experiments, different sampling frequencies (4 h, 8 h or 12 h) nearcasting the turning points are feasible, in particular, a good nearcasting prediction for the accumulated R-users are 72 h with the sampling frequencies of every 4 h and every 12 h and 78 h with the sampling frequency of every 8 h.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChaos Solitons & Fractals XSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207