skip to main content
10.1145/2488388.2488516acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswwwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

MATRI: a multi-aspect and transitive trust inference model

Authors Info & Claims
Published:13 May 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Trust inference, which is the mechanism to build new pair-wise trustworthiness relationship based on the existing ones, is a fundamental integral part in many real applications, e.g., e-commerce, social networks, peer-to-peer networks, etc. State-of-the-art trust inference approaches mainly employ the transitivity property of trust by propagating trust along connected users (a.k.a. trust propagation), but largely ignore other important properties, e.g., prior knowledge, multi-aspect, etc.

In this paper, we propose a multi-aspect trust inference model by exploring an equally important property of trust, i.e., the multi-aspect property. The heart of our method is to view the problem as a recommendation problem, and hence opens the door to the rich methodologies in the field of collaborative filtering. The proposed multi-aspect model directly characterizes multiple latent factors for each trustor and trustee from the locally-generated trust relationships. Moreover, we extend this model to incorporate the prior knowledge as well as trust propagation to further improve inference accuracy. We conduct extensive experimental evaluations on real data sets, which demonstrate that our method achieves significant improvement over several existing benchmark approaches. Overall, the proposed method (MaTrI) leads to 26.7% - 40.7% improvement over its best known competitors in prediction accuracy; and up to 7 orders of magnitude speedup with linear scalability.

References

  1. R. Bell, Y. Koren, and C. Volinsky. Modeling relationships at multiple scales to improve accuracy of large recommender systems. In KDD, pages 95--104. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Buchanan and A. Fitzgibbon. Damped newton algorithms for matrix factorization with missing data. In CVPR, volume 2, pages 316--322, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. C. Burnett, T. Norman, and K. Sycara. Bootstrapping trust evaluations through stereotypes. In AAMAS, pages 241--248, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. D. Cartwright and F. Harary. Structural balance: a generalization of heider's theory. Psychological Review, 63(5):277--293, 1956.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. K. Chiang, N. Natarajan, A. Tewari, and I. Dhillon. Exploiting longer cycles for link prediction in signed networks. In CIKM, pages 1157--1162, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. D. Gefen. Reflections on the dimensions of trust and trustworthiness among online consumers. ACM SIGMIS Database, 33(3):38--53, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. Golbeck. Trust and nuanced profile similarity in online social networks. ACM Transactions on the Web, 3(4):12, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. R. Guha, R. Kumar, P. Raghavan, and A. Tomkins. Propagation of trust and distrust. In WWW, pages 403--412. ACM, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. C.-W. Hang, Y. Wang, and M. P. Singh. Operators for propagating trust and their evaluation in social networks. In AAMAS, pages 1025--1032, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. Hsieh, K. Chiang, and I. Dhillon. Low rank modeling of signed networks. In KDD, pages 507--515. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. Jøsang and R. Ismail. The Beta reputation system. In Proc. of the 15th Bled Electronic Commerce Conference, volume 160, Bled, Slovenia, June 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. S. D. Kamvar, M. T. Schlosser, and H. Garcia-Molina. The Eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in p2p networks. In WWW, pages 640--651. ACM, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Y. Koren. Factorization meets the neighborhood: a multifaceted collaborative filtering model. In KDD, pages 426--434. ACM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Y. Koren, R. Bell, and C. Volinsky. Matrix factorization techniques for recommender systems. Computer, 42(8):30--37, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. U. Kuter and J. Golbeck. Sunny: A new algorithm for trust inference in social networks using probabilistic confidence models. In AAAI, pages 1377--1382, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. J. Leskovec, D. Huttenlocher, and J. Kleinberg. Predicting positive and negative links in online social networks. In WWW, pages 641--650. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. J. Leskovec, J. Kleinberg, and C. Faloutsos. Graphs over time: densification laws, shrinking diameters and possible explanations. In KDD, pages 177--187. ACM, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. G. Liu, Y. Wang, and M. Orgun. Optimal social trust path selection in complex social networks. In AAAI, pages 1391--1398, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. G. Liu, Y. Wang, and M. Orgun. Trust transitivity in complex social networks. In AAAI, pages 1222--1229, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. X. Liu, A. Datta, K. Rzadca, and E. Lim. Stereotrust: a group based personalized trust model. In CIKM, pages 7--16. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. H. Ma, M. Lyu, and I. King. Learning to recommend with trust and distrust relationships. In RecSys, pages 189--196. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. P. Massa and P. Avesani. Controversial users demand local trust metrics: An experimental study on epinions. com community. In AAAI, pages 121--126, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. A. Mishra and A. Bhattacharya. Finding the bias and prestige of nodes in networks based on trust scores. In WWW, pages 567--576. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. V. Nguyen, E. Lim, J. Jiang, and A. Sun. To trust or not to trust? predicting online trusts using trust antecedent framework. In ICDM, pages 896--901. IEEE, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. M. Richardson, R. Agrawal, and P. Domingos. Trust management for the Semantic Web. In ISWC, pages 351--368. Springer, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. J. Sabater and C. Sierra. Reputation and social network analysis in multi-agent systems. In AAMAS, pages 475--482. ACM, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. D. Sirdeshmukh, J. Singh, and B. Sabol. Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges. The Journal of Marketing, pages 15--37, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. J. Tang, H. Gao, and H. Liu. mTrust: discerning multi-faceted trust in a connected world. In WSDM, pages 93--102. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. J. Tang, H. Liu, H. Gao, and A. Das Sarmas. etrust: understanding trust evolution in an online world. In KDD, pages 253--261. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. A. Tversky and D. Kahneman. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. science, 185(4157):1124--1131, 1974.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. G. Wang and J. Wu. Multi-dimensional evidence-based trust management with multi-trusted paths. Future Generation Computer Systems, 27(5):529--538, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Y. Wang and M. P. Singh. Trust representation and aggregation in a distributed agent system. In AAAI, pages 1425--1430, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Y. Wang and M. P. Singh. Formal trust model for multiagent systems. In IJCAI, pages 1551--1556, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. D. Watts and S. Strogatz. Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. Nature, 393(6684):440--442, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. R. Xiang, J. Neville, and M. Rogati. Modeling relationship strength in online social networks. In WWW, pages 981--990. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. L. Xiong and L. Liu. Peertrust: Supporting reputation-based trust for peer-to-peer electronic communities. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 16(7):843--857, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Y. Yao, H. Tong, F. Xu, and J. Lu. Subgraph extraction for trust inference in social networks. In ASONAM, pages 163--170, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Y. Yao, H. Tong, X. Yan, F. Xu, and J. Lu. Matrust: An effective multi-aspect trust inference model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1211.2041, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. C. Ziegler and G. Lausen. Propagation models for trust and distrust in social networks. Information Systems Frontiers, 7(4):337--358, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. MATRI: a multi-aspect and transitive trust inference model

    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

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader