Analysing user retweeting behaviour on microblogs: prediction model and influencing features
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
This paper explores the feasibility of predicting users' retweeting behaviour and ranks the influencing features affecting that behaviour. The four first-dimension features, namely author, text, recipient and relationship are extracted and split into 39 second-dimension features. This study then applies support vector machine (SVM) to build the prediction model. Data samples extracted from Sina Microblog platform are subsequently used to evaluate this prediction model and rank the 39 second-dimension features. The results show the recall rate of this model is 58.67%, the precision rate is 82.19%, and the F1 test value is 68.46%, which show that the performance of the prediction model is highly satisfactory. Moreover, results of ranking indicate four features affect retweeting behaviour of users: the active degree of microblog author, the similarity of interests between the author and the recipient, the active degree of microblog recipient and the similarity between the theme of microblog and the recipient's interest.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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