Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28719651›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Link prediction on Twitter.

Sanda Martinčić-Ipšić, Edvin Močibob, Matjaž Perc

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A New Strategy in Boosting Information Spread.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  2. What drives disease flows between locations?Transactions in GIS : TG · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sanda Martinčić-IpšićDepartment of Informatics, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia.
Edvin MočibobDepartment of Informatics, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia.
Matjaž PercFaculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3087-541X
University of Rijeka · HRUniversity of Maribor · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With over 300 million active users, Twitter is among the largest online news and social networking services in existence today. Open access to information on Twitter makes it a valuable source of data for research on social interactions, sentiment analysis, content diffusion, link prediction, and the dynamics behind human collective behaviour in general. Here we use Twitter data to construct co-occurrence language networks based on hashtags and based on all the words in tweets, and we use these networks to study link prediction by means of different methods and evaluation metrics. In addition to using five known methods, we propose two effective weighted similarity measures, and we compare the obtained outcomes in dependence on the selected semantic context of topics on Twitter. We find that hashtag networks yield to a large degree equal results as all-word networks, thus supporting the claim that hashtags alone robustly capture the semantic context of tweets, and as such are useful and suitable for studying the content and categorization. We also introduce ranking diagrams as an efficient tool for the comparison of the performance of different link prediction algorithms across multiple datasets. Our research indicates that successful link prediction algorithms work well in correctly foretelling highly probable links even if the information about a network structure is incomplete, and they do so even if the semantic context is rationalized to hashtags.

Indexed as

Statistics as TopicHumansSocial Media

Identifiers

PMID28719651
PMCPMC5515441
OpenAlexW2737056279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.