Seed Selection for Spread of Influence in Social Networks: Temporal vs. Static Approach

The problem of finding optimal set of users for influencing others in the social network has been widely studied. Because it is NP-hard, some heuristics were proposed to find sub-optimal solutions. Still, one of the commonly used assumption is the one that seeds are chosen on the static network, not the dynamic one. This static approach is in fact far from the real-world networks, where new nodes may appear and old ones dynamically disappear in course of time.The main purpose of this paper is to analyse how the results of one of the typical models for spread of influence - linear threshold - differ depending on the strategy of building the social network used later for choosing seeds. To show the impact of network creation strategy on the final number of influenced nodes - outcome of spread of influence, the results for three approaches were studied: one static and two temporal with different granularities, i.e. various number of time windows. Social networks for each time window encapsulated dynamic changes in the network structure. Calculation of various node structural measures like degree or betweenness respected these changes by means of forgetting mechanism - more recent data had greater influence on node measure values. These measures were, in turn, used for node ranking and their selection for seeding.All concepts were applied to experimental verification on five real datasets. The results revealed that temporal approach is always better than static and the higher granularity in the temporal social network while seeding, the more finally influenced nodes. Additionally, outdegree measure with exponential forgetting typically outperformed other time-dependent structural measures, if used for seed candidate ranking.

[1]  P. Clifford,et al.  A model for spatial conflict , 1973 .

[2]  BonchiFrancesco,et al.  A data-based approach to social influence maximization , 2011, VLDB 2011.

[3]  Przemyslaw Kazienko,et al.  Matching Organizational Structure and Social Network Extracted from Email Communication , 2011, BIS.

[4]  Przemyslaw Kazienko,et al.  Convince a Dozen More and Succeed -- The Influence in Multi-layered Social Networks , 2013, 2013 International Conference on Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems.

[5]  J. Moon,et al.  On cliques in graphs , 1965 .

[6]  Éva Tardos,et al.  Maximizing the Spread of Influence through a Social Network , 2015, Theory Comput..

[7]  Dariusz Król,et al.  On Modelling Social Propagation Phenomenon , 2014, ACIIDS.

[8]  S. Holm.  A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[9]  Yifei Yuan,et al.  Scalable Influence Maximization in Social Networks under the Linear Threshold Model , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining.

[10]  Masahiro Kimura,et al.  Prediction of Information Diffusion Probabilities for Independent Cascade Model , 2008, KES.

[11]  Aristides Gionis,et al.  Sparsification of influence networks , 2011, KDD.

[12]  Yiming Yang,et al.  The Enron Corpus: A New Dataset for Email Classi(cid:12)cation Research , 2004 .

[13]  R. E. Lee,et al.  Distribution-free multiple comparisons between successive treatments , 1995 .

[14]  P. Holme,et al.  Predicting and controlling infectious disease epidemics using temporal networks , 2013, F1000prime reports.

[15]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Quantifying social group evolution , 2007, Nature.

[16]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Inferring networks of diffusion and influence , 2010, KDD.

[17]  Laks V. S. Lakshmanan,et al.  SIMPATH: An Efficient Algorithm for Influence Maximization under the Linear Threshold Model , 2011, 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining.

[18]  Jacob Goldenberg,et al.  Talk of the Network: A Complex Systems Look at the Underlying Process of Word-of-Mouth , 2001 .

[19]  A. Pan,et al.  On Finding and Updating Spanning Trees and Shortest Paths , 1975, SIAM J. Comput..

[20]  Gábor Csárdi,et al.  The igraph software package for complex network research , 2006 .

[21]  Eyal Even-Dar,et al.  A note on maximizing the spread of influence in social networks , 2007, Inf. Process. Lett..

[22]  Mark S. Granovetter.  Threshold Models of Collective Behavior , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[23]  C. Prell.  Social Network Analysis: History, Theory and Methodology , 2011 .

[24]  Przemyslaw Kazienko,et al.  Label-dependent node classification in the network , 2012, Neurocomputing.

[25]  Tore Opsahl,et al.  Clustering in weighted networks , 2009, Soc. Networks.

[26]  G. Hommel,et al.  Improvements of General Multiple Test Procedures for Redundant Systems of Hypotheses , 1988 .

[27]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  The link-prediction problem for social networks , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[28]  Laks V. S. Lakshmanan,et al.  On minimizing budget and time in influence propagation over social networks , 2012, Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[29]  Petter Holme,et al.  Threshold model of cascades in temporal networks , 2012, ArXiv.

[30]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  On the evolution of user interaction in Facebook , 2009, WOSN '09.

[31]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[32]  Jari Saramäki,et al.  Small But Slow World: How Network Topology and Burstiness Slow Down Spreading , 2010, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[33]  Munmun De Choudhury,et al.  Social Synchrony: Predicting Mimicry of User Actions in Online Social Media , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering.

[34]  J. Shaffer.  Multiple Hypothesis Testing , 1995 .

[35]  Laks V. S. Lakshmanan,et al.  A Data-Based Approach to Social Influence Maximization , 2011, Proc. VLDB Endow..

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

[37]  Jari Saramäki,et al.  Temporal Networks , 2011, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[38]  Jon Kleinberg,et al.  The link prediction problem for social networks , 2003, CIKM '03.

[39]  Przemyslaw Kazienko,et al.  Compensatory seeding in networks with varying avaliability of nodes , 2013, 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM 2013).

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

[41]  Gueorgi Kossinets,et al.  Empirical Analysis of an Evolving Social Network , 2006, Science.

[42]  Krzysztof Juszczyszyn,et al.  Quantifying social network dynamics , 2012, 2012 Fourth International Conference on Computational Aspects of Social Networks (CASoN).

[43]  M. Friedman.  The Use of Ranks to Avoid the Assumption of Normality Implicit in the Analysis of Variance , 1937 .