Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37006322›Full record

ArticleSocial network analysis and mining2023

Deep learning-based credibility conversation detection approaches from social network.

Imen Fadhli, Lobna Hlaoua, Mohamed Nazih Omri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social network analysis and mining, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Imen FadhliMARS Research Laboratory LR17ES05, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia.
Lobna Hlaoua *MARS Research Laboratory LR17ES05, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia.
Mohamed Nazih Omri *MARS Research Laboratory LR17ES05, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the social networks that have become most exploited sources of information, such as Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter, have been considered the main sources of non-credible information. False information on these social networks has a negative impact on the credibility of conversations. In this article, we propose a new deep learning-based credibility conversation detection approach in social network environments, called CreCDA. CreCDA is based on: (i) the combination of post and user features in order to detect credible and non-credible conversations; (ii) the integration of multi-dense layers to represent features more deeply and to improve the results; (iii) sentiment calculation based on the aggregation of tweets. In order to study the performance of our approach, we have used the standard PHEME dataset. We compared our approach with the main approaches we have studied in the literature. The results of this evaluation show the effectiveness of sentiment analysis and the combination of text and user levels to analyze conversation credibility. We recorded the mean precision of credible and non-credible conversations at 79%, the mean recall at 79%, the mean F1-score at 79%, the mean accuracy at 81%, and the mean G-Mean at 79%.

Indexed as

Credibility detectionDeep learningPost featuresSentiment analysisTwitter conversationUser features

Identifiers

PMID37006322
PMCPMC10049911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.