Inferring parent–child relationships by a node-remove centrality framework in online social networks

Abstract Online social networks can represent various kinds of relationships between users, so a significant task is to infer specific relationships, especially family members or romantic partners, by analyzing network topologies. In this study, we explored to infer a special kind of family links (i.e., parent–child links) in the QQ social network (the largest online social network of China) based on multiple node centrality algorithms. We found that most parent–child links are weak social embeddedness (weak tie) instead of strong embeddedness (strong tie), resulting that such kind of links are very difficult to detect in the user’s ego social network. To get a high accurate detection, we firstly utilized user profile information such as age and gender to filter out the set of potential links and then combined network structure mining. We proposed a novel node-remove framework to measure a node centrality considering its direct and indirect effect on network topologies, and our method obtained a 11.3% higher performance than “dispersion” which is a new network centrality proposed in a recent study. We also found that calculating indirect effect by using a semi-local structure can obtain a better performance than using local or global structures, which suggests that parent–child links have a meso-scopic topology effect. Our method may not only infer parent–child relationships effectively, but could also detect other hierarchical relationships, such as manager–subordinate and advisor–advisee ties in online social networks.

[1]  Leo Katz,et al.  A new status index derived from sociometric analysis , 1953 .

[2]  Xiao-Ke Xu,et al.  Flexible sampling large-scale social networks by self-adjustable random walk , 2016 .

[3]  Jian Zhao,et al.  egoSlider: Visual Analysis of Egocentric Network Evolution , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[4]  Ernesto Estrada,et al.  Communicability in complex networks. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[5]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Sex differences in intimate relationships , 2012, Scientific Reports.

[6]  Gert Sabidussi,et al.  The centrality index of a graph , 1966 .

[7]  Alex Bavelas,et al.  Communication Patterns in Task‐Oriented Groups , 1950 .

[8]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[9]  Zhihai Rong,et al.  Development of friendship network among young scientists in an international Summer School , 2009 .

[10]  K. Goh,et al.  Universal behavior of load distribution in scale-free networks. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[11]  U. Brandes A faster algorithm for betweenness centrality , 2001 .

[12]  Jeffrey Scott Vitter,et al.  Random sampling with a reservoir , 1985, TOMS.

[13]  Zhao-Long Hu,et al.  Statistical properties of the personal social network in the Facebook , 2013 .

[14]  Mark Newman,et al.  Networks: An Introduction , 2010 .

[15]  Qiang Guo,et al.  Identifying the perceptive users for online social systems , 2017, PloS one.

[16]  L. Freeman Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[17]  Xi Youmin,et al.  The core and coritivity of a system (IV) — Relations between a system and its complement , 1993 .

[18]  A-L Barabási,et al.  Structure and tie strengths in mobile communication networks , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  Leonard M. Freeman,et al.  A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness , 1977 .

[20]  J. A. Rodríguez-Velázquez,et al.  Subgraph centrality in complex networks. , 2005, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.