Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining 2017 2017
DOI: 10.1145/3110025.3110028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rumor Source Detection in Finite Graphs with Boundary Effects by Message-passing Algorithms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, even for regular trees, the available performance guarantee is far from being useful in practice. Even in the most idealized situation of infinite regular trees, the correct probability of the rumor center is almost always below 0.3 (Shah & Zaman, 2011;Dong et al, 2013;Yu et al, 2018). For general graphs, as we show later, the correct rate of such a single-point estimation method only becomes too low to be practical.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Second, even for regular trees, the available performance guarantee is far from being useful in practice. Even in the most idealized situation of infinite regular trees, the correct probability of the rumor center is almost always below 0.3 (Shah & Zaman, 2011;Dong et al, 2013;Yu et al, 2018). For general graphs, as we show later, the correct rate of such a single-point estimation method only becomes too low to be practical.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Though early practices have been done for this important problem with motivations from various domains, systematic research on this problem only began very recently, arguably starting from the seminal work of Shah & Zaman (2011), which proposed a rumor center estimator that can be located by an efficient message-passing algorithm with linear time complexity. Despite the significant interest and progress on this problem in recent years (Shah & Zaman, 2012;Dong et al, 2013;Khim & Loh, 2016;Bubeck et al, 2017;Yu et al, 2018;Crane & Xu, 2020), many challenges remain unaddressed. First, the theoretical understanding of these methods is currently only available under very restrictive and somewhat unrealistic structural assumptions of the networks such as regular trees.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The identification of sources is critical in different fields of operation Because of its wide variety of uses, major advances in the identification of origins have been observed in the last two decades. Significant research has been conducted into sources in a range of application areas, such as healthcare (the first patient to be discovered to monitor an influenza pandemic) [53], surveillance (computer virus sources) [54], and wide interconnected networks (wireless sensor network gas leak source [55], e-mail network source [56], dynamic network propagating sources [57] and social network rumor disinformation sources [23,27]).…”
Section: Related Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some studies worked with rumor source identification as a tree-like network [19][20][21][22]. Yu et al [23] applied a finite graph and use the message-passing approach for source detection, to reduce the search of vertices for estimating the maximum likelihood. In another approach, Xu et al [24] proposed a source detection method by applying sensor nodes in the network that do not use the rumor's text.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, some methods provide in-depth analysis around content features, e.g., linguistic (Reis et al, 2019), semantic (De Sarkar et al, 2018), emotional (Ajao et al, 2019), and stylistic (Potthast et al, 2018), and achieve limited performance. On this basis, some work additionally extracts various social context features as credibility features, including meta-data based (i.e., source-based (Rathore et al, 2017;Yu et al, 2018), user-centered (Long et al, 2017;Ribeiro et al, 2017), and post-based (Wang, 2017;Ma et al, 2018b)) and networkbased (Ruchansky et al, 2017;Liu & Wu, 2018;, and promotes the development of different fusion approaches, such as hybrid-CNN model (Wang, 2017), CSI model (Ruchansky et al, 2017), and tree-structured RNN (Ma et al, 2018b), which gain remarkable performance boosts compared to other models only capturing text features. From these methods, we can find that expanding features can significantly improve the performance of credibility evaluation.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%