Evaluating stochastic seeding strategies in networks

When trying to maximize the adoption of a behavior in a population connected by a social network, it is common to strategize about where in the network to seed the behavior, often with an element of randomness. Selecting seeds uniformly at random is a basic but compelling strategy in that it distributes seeds broadly throughout the network. A more sophisticated stochastic strategy, one-hop targeting, is to select random network neighbors of random individuals; this exploits a version of the friendship paradox, whereby the friend of a random individual is expected to have more friends than a random individual, with the hope that seeding a behavior at more connected individuals leads to more adoption. Many seeding strategies have been proposed, but empirical evaluations have demanded large field experiments designed specifically for this purpose and have yielded relatively imprecise comparisons of strategies. Here we show how stochastic seeding strategies can be evaluated more efficiently in such experiments, how they can be evaluated “off-policy” using existing data arising from experiments designed for other purposes, and how to design more efficient experiments. In particular, we consider contrasts between stochastic seeding strategies and analyze nonparametric estimators adapted from policy evaluation and importance sampling. We use simulations on real networks to show that the proposed estimators and designs can substantially increase precision while yielding valid inference. We then apply our proposed estimators to two field experiments, one that assigned households to an intensive marketing intervention and one that assigned students to an antibullying intervention. This paper was accepted by Gui Liberali, Special Issue on Data-Driven Prescriptive Analytics.

[1]  Spyros I. Zoumpoulis,et al.  Efficiently Evaluating Targeting Policies: Improving on Champion vs. Challenger Experiments , 2020, Manag. Sci..

[2]  K. Sudhir,et al.  Can Friends Seed More Buzz and Adoption? , 2019, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[3]  R. Kohli,et al.  Friendship Paradox Generalization and Centrality Measures , 2019 .

[4]  Elchanan Mossel,et al.  Seeding with Costly Network Information , 2019, EC.

[5]  Florian Stahl,et al.  Climb or Jump: Status-Based Seeding in User-Generated Content Networks , 2019, Journal of Marketing Research.

[6]  Arun G. Chandrasekhar,et al.  When Celebrities Speak: A Nationwide Twitter Experiment Promoting Vaccination in Indonesia , 2019, ArXiv.

[7]  Iv'an D'iaz,et al.  Causal mediation analysis for stochastic interventions , 2019, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology).

[8]  David G. Rand,et al.  Credibility-enhancing displays promote the provision of non-normative public goods , 2018, Nature.

[9]  Peng Ding,et al.  Randomization Tests for Weak Null Hypotheses in Randomized Experiments , 2018, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[10]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  Diffusion of agricultural information within social networks: Evidence on gender inequalities from Mali , 2018, Journal of Development Economics.

[11]  Paramveer S. Dhillon,et al.  Social influence maximization under empirical influence models , 2018, Nature Human Behaviour.

[12]  Nicole Immorlica,et al.  Maximizing Influence in an Unknown Social Network , 2018, AAAI.

[13]  A. Saberi,et al.  Just a Few Seeds More: Value of Network Information for Diffusion , 2018 .

[14]  Kristen M. Altenburger,et al.  Monophily in social networks introduces similarity among friends-of-friends , 2018, Nature Human Behaviour.

[15]  Sanjog Misra,et al.  Heterogeneous Treatment Effects and Optimal Targeting Policy Evaluation , 2018 .

[16]  Edridah M. Tukahebwa,et al.  Diffusion of treatment in social networks and mass drug administration , 2017, Nature Communications.

[17]  Sanjeev Goyal,et al.  Targeting Interventions in Networks , 2017, Econometrica.

[18]  Mason A. Porter,et al.  Core-Periphery Structure in Networks (Revisited) , 2017, SIAM Rev..

[19]  Sebastian E. Ahnert,et al.  Social network fragmentation and community health , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[20]  Michael G. Rabbat,et al.  Inferring Structural Characteristics of Networks With Strong and Weak Ties From Fixed-Choice Surveys , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Signal and Information Processing over Networks.

[21]  Arun G. Chandrasekhar,et al.  Using Gossips to Spread Information: Theory and Evidence from Two Randomized Controlled Trials , 2017, The Review of Economic Studies.

[22]  Joseph P. Romano,et al.  Randomization Tests Under an Approximate Symmetry Assumption , 2017 .

[23]  Edward H. Kennedy Nonparametric Causal Effects Based on Incremental Propensity Score Interventions , 2017, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[24]  Caroline Wiertz,et al.  Advertising to Early Trend Propagators: Evidence from Twitter , 2017, Mark. Sci..

[25]  James P. Bagrow,et al.  Which friends are more popular than you?: Contact strength and the friendship paradox in social networks , 2017, ASONAM.

[26]  Holly B. Shakya,et al.  Exploiting social influence to magnify population-level behaviour change in maternal and child health: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of network targeting algorithms in rural Honduras , 2017, BMJ Open.

[27]  Stefan Wager,et al.  Efficient Policy Learning , 2017, ArXiv.

[28]  Xuping Jiang,et al.  Tweeting as a Marketing Tool: A Field Experiment in the TV Industry , 2017 .

[29]  Dean Eckles,et al.  Estimating peer effects in networks with peer encouragement designs , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[30]  John Langford,et al.  Off-policy evaluation for slate recommendation , 2016, NIPS.

[31]  E. Paluck,et al.  Changing climates of conflict: A social network experiment in 56 schools , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  N. Christakis,et al.  Social network targeting to maximise population behaviour change: a cluster randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[33]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  Counterfactual Risk Minimization , 2015, ICML.

[34]  Silvio Lattanzi,et al.  The Power of Random Neighbors in Social Networks , 2015, WSDM.

[35]  John Langford,et al.  Doubly Robust Policy Evaluation and Optimization , 2014, ArXiv.

[36]  Lihong Li,et al.  On Minimax Optimal Offline Policy Evaluation , 2014, ArXiv.

[37]  Matthew O. Jackson,et al.  Using Gossips to Spread Information]{Using Gossips to Spread Information: Theory and Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial , 2014 .

[38]  Dean Eckles,et al.  Design and Analysis of Experiments in Networks: Reducing Bias from Interference , 2014, ArXiv.

[39]  Dylan Walker,et al.  Tie Strength, Embeddedness, and Social Influence: A Large-Scale Networked Experiment , 2014, Manag. Sci..

[40]  Pascal Van Hentenryck,et al.  Performance of Social Network Sensors during Hurricane Sandy , 2014, PloS one.

[41]  Joel A. Middleton,et al.  A Class of Unbiased Estimators of the Average Treatment Effect in Randomized Experiments , 2013 .

[42]  Joseph P. Romano,et al.  EXACT AND ASYMPTOTICALLY ROBUST PERMUTATION TESTS , 2013, 1304.5939.

[43]  Arun Sundararajan,et al.  Engineering social contagions: Optimal network seeding in the presence of homophily , 2013, Network Science.

[44]  Manuel Cebrián,et al.  Using Friends as Sensors to Detect Global-Scale Contagious Outbreaks , 2012, PloS one.

[45]  Kenneth Gillingham,et al.  Peer Effects in the Diffusion of Solar Photovoltaic Panels , 2012, Mark. Sci..

[46]  Jing Cai,et al.  Social Networks and the Decision to Insure , 2012 .

[47]  Sinan Aral,et al.  Identifying Influential and Susceptible Members of Social Networks , 2012, Science.

[48]  Rong Yan,et al.  Social influence in social advertising: evidence from field experiments , 2012, EC '12.

[49]  M. J. van der Laan,et al.  Population Intervention Causal Effects Based on Stochastic Interventions , 2012, Biometrics.

[50]  Lars Backstrom,et al.  Structural diversity in social contagion , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[51]  Arun G. Chandrasekhar,et al.  The Diffusion of Microfinance , 2012, Science.

[52]  Jan U. Becker,et al.  Seeding Strategies for Viral Marketing: An Empirical Comparison , 2011 .

[53]  Hema Yoganarasimhan,et al.  Impact of social network structure on content propagation: A study using YouTube data , 2011, Quantitative Marketing and Economics.

[54]  Tanya Y. Berger-Wolf,et al.  Benefits of bias: towards better characterization of network sampling , 2011, KDD.

[55]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Local opinion leaders: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[56]  Thomas W. Valente,et al.  Opinion Leadership and Social Contagion in New Product Diffusion , 2011, Mark. Sci..

[57]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Everyone's an influencer: quantifying influence on twitter , 2011, WSDM '11.

[58]  Miklos Sarvary,et al.  Advertising to a social network , 2011 .

[59]  Amin Saberi,et al.  How to distribute antidote to control epidemics , 2010, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[60]  N. Christakis,et al.  Social Network Sensors for Early Detection of Contagious Outbreaks , 2010, PloS one.

[61]  Wei Chu,et al.  Unbiased offline evaluation of contextual-bandit-based news article recommendation algorithms , 2010, WSDM '11.

[62]  Arun Sundararajan,et al.  Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[63]  K. Hirano,et al.  Asymptotics for Statistical Treatment Rules , 2009 .

[64]  Silvio Lattanzi,et al.  Rumor spreading in social networks , 2009, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[65]  Yajun Wang,et al.  Efficient influence maximization in social networks , 2009, KDD.

[66]  S Audrey,et al.  An informal school-based peer-led intervention for smoking prevention in adolescence (ASSIST): a cluster randomised trial , 2008, The Lancet.

[67]  Charles F. Manski,et al.  Identification for Prediction and Decision , 2008 .

[68]  Catherine Tucker,et al.  Identifying Formal and Informal Influence in Technology Adoption with Network Externalities , 2008, Manag. Sci..

[69]  M. Macy,et al.  Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties1 , 2007, American Journal of Sociology.

[70]  Andreas Krause,et al.  Cost-effective outbreak detection in networks , 2007, KDD '07.

[71]  Shlomo Havlin,et al.  Improving immunization strategies. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[72]  A RAPOPORT,et al.  A study of a large sociogram. , 2007 .

[73]  F. Provost,et al.  Network-Based Marketing: Identifying Likely Adopters Via Consumer Networks , 2006, math/0606278.

[74]  J. Robins,et al.  Comparison of dynamic treatment regimes via inverse probability weighting. , 2006, Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology.

[75]  P. Bearman,et al.  Cloning Headless Frogs and Other Important Matters: Conversation Topics and Network Structure , 2004 .

[76]  Harikesh S. Nair,et al.  Empirical Analysis of Indirect Network Effects in the Market for Personal Digital Assistants , 2004 .

[77]  Jon Kleinberg,et al.  Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network , 2003, KDD '03.

[78]  C. Manski Statistical treatment rules for heterogeneous populations , 2003 .

[79]  S. Murphy,et al.  Optimal dynamic treatment regimes , 2003 .

[80]  Matthew Richardson,et al.  Mining knowledge-sharing sites for viral marketing , 2002, KDD.

[81]  Reuven Cohen,et al.  Efficient immunization strategies for computer networks and populations. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[82]  M. J. van der Laan,et al.  Marginal Mean Models for Dynamic Regimes , 2001, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[83]  Matthew Richardson,et al.  Mining the network value of customers , 2001, KDD '01.

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

[85]  Martin G. Everett,et al.  Models of core/periphery structures , 2000, Soc. Networks.

[86]  Doina Precup,et al.  Eligibility Traces for Off-Policy Policy Evaluation , 2000, ICML.

[87]  Kosuke Imai,et al.  Survey Sampling , 1998, Nov/Dec 2017.

[88]  P. Bearman,et al.  Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. , 1997 .

[89]  Carl-Erik Särndal,et al.  Model Assisted Survey Sampling , 1997 .

[90]  K. Campbell,et al.  Name generators in surveys of personal networks , 1991 .

[91]  S. Feld Why Your Friends Have More Friends Than You Do , 1991, American Journal of Sociology.

[92]  D. Rubin [On the Application of Probability Theory to Agricultural Experiments. Essay on Principles. Section 9.] Comment: Neyman (1923) and Causal Inference in Experiments and Observational Studies , 1990 .

[93]  T. Speed,et al.  On the Application of Probability Theory to Agricultural Experiments. Essay on Principles. Section 9 , 1990 .

[94]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Epidemic algorithms for replicated database maintenance , 1988, OPSR.

[95]  Doug McAdam Recruitment to High-Risk Activism: The Case of Freedom Summer , 1986, American Journal of Sociology.

[96]  Michael Luby,et al.  A simple parallel algorithm for the maximal independent set problem , 1985, STOC '85.

[97]  Carl Erik Sarndal,et al.  On Uniformly Minimum Variance Estimation in Finite Populations , 1976 .

[98]  D. Rubin Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. , 1974 .

[99]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[100]  J. Coleman,et al.  The Diffusion of an Innovation Among Physicians , 1957 .

[101]  D. Horvitz,et al.  A Generalization of Sampling Without Replacement from a Finite Universe , 1952 .

[102]  R Fisher,et al.  Design of Experiments , 1936 .

[103]  R. Fisher Statistical methods for research workers , 1927, Protoplasma.

[104]  David Krackhardt,et al.  Based on Inversity : Leveraging the Friendship Paradox in Unknown Network Structures , 2018 .

[105]  N. Christakis,et al.  Social networks and health: a systematic review of sociocentric network studies in low- and middle-income countries. , 2015, Social science & medicine.

[106]  D. Rubin,et al.  Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: Instrumental Variables Analysis of Randomized Experiments with Two-Sided Noncompliance , 2015 .

[107]  E. Muller,et al.  Decomposing the Value of Word-of-Mouth Seeding Programs: Acceleration vs. Expansion , 2012 .

[108]  M. Jackson,et al.  From the Cover: Identifying the roles of race-based choice and chance in high school friendship network formation , 2010 .

[109]  R. Winett,et al.  Outcomes of a randomized community-level HIV prevention intervention for women living in 18 low-income housing developments. , 2000, American journal of public health.

[110]  Trish,et al.  Protecting adolescents from harm. Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. , 1997, JAMA.

[111]  D. Krackhardt Structural Leverage in Marketing , 1996 .

[112]  J. Robins A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period—application to control of the healthy worker survivor effect , 1986 .

[113]  Roderick J. A. Little,et al.  Estimating a Finite Population Mean from Unequal Probability Samples , 1983 .