Inferring social networks from unstructured text data: A proof of concept detection of hidden communities of interest
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 Social network analysis is known to provide a wealth of insights relevant to many aspects of policymaking. Yet, the social data needed to construct social networks are not always available. Furthermore, even when they are, interpreting such networks often relies on extraneous knowledge. Here, we propose an approach to infer social networks directly from the texts produced by actors and the terminological similarities that these texts exhibit. This approach relies on fitting a topic model to the texts produced by these actors and measuring topic profile correlations between actors. This reveals what can be called “hidden communities of interest,” that is, groups of actors sharing similar semantic contents but whose social relationships with one another may be unknown or underlying. Network interpretation follows from the topic model. Diachronic perspectives can also be built by modeling the networks over different time periods and mapping genealogical relationships between communities. As a case study, the approach is deployed over a working corpus of academic articles (domain of philosophy of science; N =16,917).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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