skip to main content
10.1145/2487575.2487685acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Estimating sharer reputation via social data calibration

Published:11 August 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Online social networks have become important channels for users to share content with their connections and diffuse information. Although much work has been done to identify socially influential users, the problem of finding "reputable" sharers, who share good content, has received relatively little attention. Availability of such reputation scores can be useful or various applications like recommending people to follow, procuring high quality content in a scalable way, creating a content reputation economy to incentivize high quality sharing, and many more. To estimate sharer reputation, it is intuitive to leverage data that records how recipients respond (through clicking, liking, etc.) to content items shared by a sharer. However, such data is usually biased --- it has a selection bias since the shared items can only be seen and responded to by users connected to the sharer in most social networks, and it has a response bias since the response is usually influenced by the relationship between the sharer and the recipient (which may not indicate whether the shared content is good). To correct for such biases, we propose to utilize an additional data source that provides unbiased goodness estimates for a small set of shared items, and calibrate biased social data through a novel multi-level hierarchical model that describes how the unbiased data and biased data are jointly generated according to sharer reputation scores. The unbiased data also provides the ground truth for quantitative evaluation of different methods. Experiments based on such ground-truth data show that our proposed model significantly outperforms existing methods that estimate social influence using biased social data.

References

  1. D. Agarwal, B.-C. Chen, and P. Elango. Explore/exploit schemes for web content optimization. In ICDM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Anderson, D. P. Huttenlocher, J. M. Kleinberg, and J. Leskovec. Discovering value from community activity on focused question answering sites: a case study of stack overflow. In KDD, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. Anderson, D. P. Huttenlocher, J. M. Kleinberg, and J. Leskovec. Effects of user similarity in social media. In WSDM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Brin and L. Page. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Computer Networks, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. M. Cha, H. Haddadi, F. Benevenuto, and P. K. Gummadi. Measuring user influence in twitter: The million follower fallacy. In ICWSM, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. B.-C. Chen, A. Dasgupta, X. Wang, and J. Yang. Vote calibration in community question-answering systems. In SIGIR, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. B.-C. Chen, J. Guo, B. L. Tseng, and J. Yang. User reputation in a comment rating environment. In KDD, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. D. J. Crandall, D. Cosley, D. P. Huttenlocher, J. M. Kleinberg, and S. Suri. Feedback effects between similarity and social influence in online communities. In KDD, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. C. Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, M. Gamon, and S. T. Dumais. Mark my words!: linguistic style accommodation in social media. In WWW, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. K. El-Arini, U. Paquet, R. Herbrich, J. V. Gael, and B. A. y Arcas. Transparent user models for personalization. In KDD, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. R.-E. Fan, K.-W. Chang, C.-J. Hsieh, X.-R. Wang, and C.-J. Lin. Liblinear: A library for large linear classification. JMLR, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. W.-S. Hwang, H.-J. Lee, S.-W. Kim, and M. Lee. On using category experts for improving the performance and accuracy in recommender systems. In CIKM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. U. Kang, S. Papadimitriou, J. Sun, and H. Tong. Centralities in large networks: Algorithms and observations. In SDM, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. E. Katz and P. Lazarsfeld. Personal influence: the part played by people in the flow of mass communications. Foundations of communications research. 1955.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. D. Kempe, J. M. Kleinberg, and É. Tardos. Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. In KDD, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Y. Kim and K. Shim. Twitobi: A recommendation system for twitter using probabilistic modeling. In ICDM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. J. M. Kleinberg. Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. JACM, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. P. Li, J. X. Yu, H. Liu, J. He, and X. Du. Ranking individuals and groups by influence propagation. In PAKDD, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. B. Liu and L. Zhang. A survey of opinion mining and sentiment analysis. In Mining Text Data. 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. L. Liu, J. Tang, J. Han, M. Jiang, and S. Yang. Mining topic-level influence in heterogeneous networks. In CIKM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. A. S. Maiya and T. Y. Berger-Wolf. Online sampling of high centrality individuals in social networks. In PAKDD, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. A. Pal and S. Counts. Identifying topical authorities in microblogs. In WSDM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. B. A. Prakash and C. Faloutsos. Understanding and managing cascades on large graphs. PVLDB, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. M. Sachan, D. Contractor, T. A. Faruquie, and L. V. Subramaniam. Using content and interactions for discovering communities in social networks. In WWW, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. D. Sáez-Trumper, G. Comarela, V. A. F. Almeida, R. A. Baeza-Yates, and F. Benevenuto. Finding trendsetters in information networks. In KDD, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. T. Sakai, D. Ishikawa, N. Kando, Y. Seki, K. Kuriyama, and C.-Y. Lin. Using graded-relevance metrics for evaluating community qa answer selection. In WSDM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Y. R. Tausczik and J. W. Pennebaker. Participation in an online mathematics community: differentiating motivations to add. In CSCW, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. G. Wang, Y. Zhao, X. Shi, and P. S. Yu. Magnet community identification on social networks. In KDD, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. D. J. Watts and P. S. Dodds. Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. Journal of Consumer Research, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. J. Weng, E.-P. Lim, J. Jiang, and Q. He. Twitterrank: finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers. In WSDM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Estimating sharer reputation via social data calibration

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      KDD '13: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
      August 2013
      1534 pages
      ISBN:9781450321747
      DOI:10.1145/2487575

      Copyright © 2013 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 11 August 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      KDD '13 Paper Acceptance Rate125of726submissions,17%Overall Acceptance Rate1,133of8,635submissions,13%

      Upcoming Conference

      KDD '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader