MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285079561 · doi:10.1109/csci54926.2021.00279

Effects of Different Recommendation Algorithms on Structure of Social Networks

2021· article· en· W4285079561 on OpenAlex
Sepideh Banihashemi, Abdolreza Abhari

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosine similarityComputer scienceCluster analysisSimilarity (geometry)Social network (sociolinguistics)GraphRecommender systemData miningInformation retrievalClustering coefficientData scienceSocial mediaTheoretical computer scienceWorld Wide WebMachine learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the effects of two algorithms (i.e., K-means clustering, Cosine similarity) on the structure of a social network (i.e., Twitter, scientific research papers) is studied to examine the formation of communities when the users follow the recommendations provided by a simulator. The relationship among the users can be either follower-followee in a Twitter dataset or a paper-publication venue in a scientific research paper dataset. The purpose is to evaluate how detected communities and the resulted network graph differ when following the recommendations provided by the employed algorithms after the system recommends the top-N recommendations for a selected user.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.298 · 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