Skip to main content

Inform or Flood: Estimating When Retweets Duplicate

  • Conference paper
User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization (UMAP 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 7899))

  • 3503 Accesses

Abstract

The social graphs of Twitter users often overlap, such that retweets may cause duplicate posts is a user’s incoming stream of tweets. Hence, it is important for the retweets to strike the balance between sharing information and flooding the recipients with redundant tweets. In this work, we present an exploratory analysis that assesses the degree of duplication caused by a set of real retweets. The results of the analysis show that although the overall duplication is not severe, high degree of duplication is caused by tweets of users with a small number of followers, which are retweeted by users with a small number of followers. We discuss the limitations of this work and propose several enhancements that we intend to pursue in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bakshy, E., Hofman, J.M., Mason, W.A., Watts, D.J.: Everyone’s an influencer: quantify-ing influence on twitter. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM 2011), pp. 65–74. ACM, New York (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Basch, D.: Some Fresh Twitter Stats (as of July 2012, Dataset Included), diego-basch.com , http://diegobasch.com/some-fresh-twitter-stats-as-of-july-2012 (accessed July 31, 2012)

  3. Berkovsky, S., Freyne, J., Kimani, S., Smith, G.: Selecting items of relevance in social network feeds. In: Konstan, J.A., Conejo, R., Marzo, J.L., Oliver, N. (eds.) UMAP 2011. LNCS, vol. 6787, pp. 329–334. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Boyd, D., Golder, S., Lotan, G.: Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Ret-weeting on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2010), pp. 1–10. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Gilbert, E., Karahalios, K.: Predicting tie strength with social media. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2009), pp. 211–220. ACM, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Granovetter, M.: Ignorance, knowledge, and outcomes in a small world. Science 301(5634), 773–774 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Java, A., Song, X., Finin, T., Tseng, B.: Why we twitter: understanding microb-logging usage and communities. In: Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 Workshop on Web Mining and Social Network Analysis (WebKDD/SNA-KDD 2007), pp. 56–65. ACM, New York (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., Moon, S.: What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW 2010), pp. 591–600. ACM, New York (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Lacaze, A., Moscovitz, Y., DeClaris, N., Murphy, K.: Path planning for autonomous vehi-cles driving over rough terrain. In: Proceedings of Intelligent Control (ISIC), 1998. Held jointly with IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation (CIRA), Intelligent Systems and Semiotics (ISAS), September 14-17, pp. 50–55 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Macskassy, S., Michelson, M.: Why do People Retweet? Anti-Homophily Wins the Day! In: International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, North America (July 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Marwick, A., Boyd, D.: Tweet Honestly, I Tweet Passionately: Twitter Users, Context Collapse, and the Imagined Audience. New Media and Society 13, 96–113 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Weng, J., Lim, E.P., Jiang, J., He, Q.: TwitterRank: finding topic-sensitive influ-ential twitterers. In: Proceedings of the Third ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM 2010), pp. 261–270. ACM, New York (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Wilson, C., Boe, B., Sala, A., Puttaswamy, K.P.N., Zhao, B.Y.: User interactions in social networks and their implications. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys 2009), pp. 205–218. ACM, New York (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Tiroshi, A., Kuflik, T., Berkovsky, S. (2013). Inform or Flood: Estimating When Retweets Duplicate. In: Carberry, S., Weibelzahl, S., Micarelli, A., Semeraro, G. (eds) User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization. UMAP 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7899. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38844-6_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38844-6_22

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-38843-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-38844-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics