Personalized multi-faceted trust modeling to determine trust links in social media and its potential for misinformation management
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we present an approach for predicting trust links between peers in social media, one that is grounded in the artificial intelligence area of multiagent trust modeling. In particular, we propose a data-driven multi-faceted trust modeling which incorporates many distinct features for a comprehensive analysis. We focus on demonstrating how clustering of similar users enables a critical new functionality: supporting more personalized, and thus more accurate predictions for users. Illustrated in a trust-aware item recommendation task, we evaluate the proposed framework in the context of a large Yelp data set. We then discuss how improving the detection of trusted relationships in social media can assist in supporting online users in their battle against the spread of misinformation and rumors, within a social networking environment which has recently exploded in popularity. We conclude with a reflection on a particularly vulnerable user base, older adults, in order to illustrate the value of reasoning about groups of users, looking to some future directions for integrating known preferences with insights gained through data analysis.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it