MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386137084 · doi:10.3934/mbe.2023752

Modeling and analyzing an opinion network dynamics considering the environmental factor

2023· article· en· W4386137084 on OpenAlexaff
Fulian Yin, Jinxia Wang, Xinyi Jiang, Yanjing Huang, Qianyi Yang, Jianhong Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Biosciences & Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOpinion Dynamics and Social Influence
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic opinionThe InternetComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Data scienceOpinion leadershipOpposition (politics)Public participationSocial network (sociolinguistics)Dissenting opinionSocial mediaInternet privacyWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligencePublic relationsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of Internet technology, social media has gradually become an important platform where users can express opinions about hot events. Research on the mechanism of public opinion evolution is beneficial to guide the trend of opinions, making users' opinions change in a positive direction or reach a consensus among controversial crowds. To design effective strategies for public opinion management, we propose a dynamic opinion network susceptible-forwarding-immune model considering environmental factors (NET-OE-SFI), which divides the forwarding nodes into two types: support and opposition based on the real data of users. The NET-OE-SFI model introduces environmental factors from infectious diseases into the study of network information transmission, which aims to explore the evolution law of users' opinions affected by the environment. We attempt to combine the complex media environmental factors in social networks with users' opinion information to study the influence of environmental factors on the evolution of public opinion. Data fitting of real information transmission data fully demonstrates the validity of this model. We have also made a variety of sensitivity analysis experiments to study the influence of model parameters, contributing to the design of reasonable and effective strategies for public opinion guidance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Biosciences & EngineeringSame topicOpinion Dynamics and Social InfluenceFrench-language works237,207