MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409603310 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-082

Modeling the Clustering Structure of Complex Networks and Calculating Propagation Thresholds for Bandwagon Behavior of Social Media Papers from the Perspective of Knowledge Reproduction and Anti-Regulatory Discipline

2025· article· en· W4409603310 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBandwagon effectPerspective (graphical)Cluster analysisReproductionSociologyComputer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceSocial psychologyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper constructs a heterogeneous network adjacency matrix containing multiple user relationships from the connotation of professional organizations and other guides to individual behaviors covered by the take-read mechanism.The GAT algorithm is used to learn the embedding of its heterogeneous network in order to obtain the embedding vectors of user nodes, which serves as the basis for the analysis of the spreading influence of group behavior.An event recognition method based on word embedding and hierarchical cohesive clustering is proposed to analyze the recognition and evolution of social media essay-carrying behavioral events (group behavioral events) for complex networks.We point out that the distribution of group behavior affects the dynamics of information dissemination, set the adoption threshold parameter of the group, and analyze the dissemination pattern of individuals' (individual information) participation in essay-reading behaviors.Analyze the emergence and evolution of thesis-reading behavior in social media, and explore the influence of individual's own attributes and the attitude of neighboring nodes on the evolution of group behavioral events in complex networks.The spreading degree analysis is conducted for different relational social media bandwagon behaviors.When , i j I =0.6 and , i j Ex =0.8, the individual's decision is supported by the neighbor's viewpoints, and the users who have already participated in the paper band-reading activities have a strong attraction to the individual.When the strong degree increases to a certain value, the individual decides to participate in the dissertation banding activity, at which point the individual is no longer influenced by the external environment.The degree of the initial node for the propagation of thesis banding behavior in random networks and small-world networks is linearly and negatively correlated with the percentage of the information audience.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.281
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207