Benchmarking Crisis in Social Media Analytics: A Solution for the Data-Sharing Problem

Computational social science uses computational and statistical methods in order to evaluate social interaction. The public availability of data sets is thus a necessary precondition for reliable and replicable research. These data allow researchers to benchmark the computational methods they develop, test the generalizability of their findings, and build confidence in their results. When social media data are concerned, data sharing is often restricted for legal or privacy reasons, which makes the comparison of methods and the replicability of research results infeasible. Social media analytics research, consequently, faces an integrity crisis. How is it possible to create trust in computational or statistical analyses, when they cannot be validated by third parties? In this work, we explore this well-known, yet little discussed, problem for social media analytics. We investigate how this problem can be solved by looking at related computational research areas. Moreover, we propose and implement a prototype to address the problem in the form of a new evaluation framework that enables the comparison of algorithms without the need to exchange data directly, while maintaining flexibility for the algorithm design.

[1]  M. Tesconi,et al.  Coordinated Behavior on Social Media in 2019 UK General Election , 2020, ICWSM.

[2]  Tristan Henderson,et al.  Making Social Media Research Reproducible , 2015, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.

[3]  Irene V. Pasquetto,et al.  Tackling misinformation: What researchers could do with social media data , 2020, Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review.

[4]  Lewis Mitchell,et al.  A method to evaluate the reliability of social media data for social network analysis , 2020, 2020 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[5]  Frank Neumann,et al.  Who's in the Gang? Revealing Coordinating Communities in Social Media , 2020, 2020 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[6]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  Threats of a replication crisis in empirical computer science , 2020, Commun. ACM.

[7]  André Calero Valdez Making Reproducible Research Simple Using RMarkdown and the OSF , 2020, HCI.

[8]  Heike Trautmann,et al.  Building an Integrated Comment Moderation System - Towards a Semi-automatic Moderation Tool , 2020, HCI.

[9]  Preslav Nakov,et al.  A Survey on Computational Propaganda Detection , 2020, IJCAI.

[10]  Jay Kumar,et al.  An Online Semantic-enhanced Dirichlet Model for Short Text Stream Clustering , 2020, ACL.

[11]  Stefano Cresci,et al.  A decade of social bot detection , 2020, Commun. ACM.

[12]  Gilles Audemard,et al.  SAT Heritage: A Community-Driven Effort for Archiving, Building and Running More Than Thousand SAT Solvers , 2020, SAT.

[13]  Heike Trautmann,et al.  A Two-Phase Framework for Detecting Manipulation Campaigns in Social Media , 2020, HCI.

[14]  Stephen R. Neely,et al.  Rise of the Machines? Examining the Influence of Social Bots on a Political Discussion Network , 2020, Social Science Computer Review.

[15]  Stephan Lewandowsky,et al.  Low replicability can support robust and efficient science , 2020, Nature Communications.

[16]  A. Flammini,et al.  Uncovering Coordinated Networks on Social Media , 2020, ICWSM.

[17]  D. Menon,et al.  How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study , 2019, BMC medical ethics.

[18]  Stefan Stieglitz,et al.  Going Back in Time to Predict the Future - The Complex Role of the Data Collection Period in Social Media Analytics , 2018, Information Systems Frontiers.

[19]  Heike Trautmann,et al.  Towards Real-Time and Unsupervised Campaign Detection in Social Media , 2020, The Florida AI Research Society.

[20]  Axel Bruns,et al.  After the ‘APIcalypse’: social media platforms and their fight against critical scholarly research , 2019, Information, Communication & Society.

[21]  Ryan Wesslen,et al.  Shouting into the Void: A Database of the Alternative Social Media Platform Gab , 2019, ICWSM.

[22]  Michael Wiegand,et al.  Detection of Abusive Language: the Problem of Biased Datasets , 2019, NAACL.

[23]  Division on Earth,et al.  Reproducibility and Replicability in Science , 2019 .

[24]  Kevin Munger The Limited Value of Non-Replicable Field Experiments in Contexts With Low Temporal Validity , 2019, Social Media + Society.

[25]  Maurizio Tesconi,et al.  RTbust: Exploiting Temporal Patterns for Botnet Detection on Twitter , 2019, WebSci.

[26]  Julian Togelius,et al.  Obstacle Tower: A Generalization Challenge in Vision, Control, and Planning , 2019, IJCAI.

[27]  Fabrizio Lillo,et al.  Cashtag Piggybacking , 2018, ACM Trans. Web.

[28]  Maria Luisa Bonet,et al.  Community Structure in Industrial SAT Instances , 2016, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[29]  Lars Kotthoff,et al.  Automated Machine Learning: Methods, Systems, Challenges , 2019, The Springer Series on Challenges in Machine Learning.

[30]  Brigitte Huber,et al.  Social media and democracy , 2018, El Profesional de la Información.

[31]  Megha Khosla,et al.  Delusive PageRank in Incomplete Graphs , 2018, COMPLEX NETWORKS.

[32]  Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia,et al.  The spread of low-credibility content by social bots , 2017, Nature Communications.

[33]  Ahmed Al-Rawi Gatekeeping Fake News Discourses on Mainstream Media Versus Social Media , 2018, Social Science Computer Review.

[34]  Sérgio Nunes,et al.  A Survey on Automatic Detection of Hate Speech in Text , 2018, ACM Comput. Surv..

[35]  Wei Zhang,et al.  Model-based Clustering of Short Text Streams , 2018, KDD.

[36]  Christian Grimme,et al.  Changing Perspectives: Is It Sufficient to Detect Social Bots? , 2018, HCI.

[37]  Christine Zarges,et al.  A black-box discrete optimization benchmarking (BB-DOB) pipeline survey: taxonomy, evaluation, and ranking , 2018, GECCO.

[38]  Angelo Spognardi,et al.  From Reaction to Proaction: Unexplored Ways to the Detection of Evolving Spambots , 2018, WWW.

[39]  C. Pagliari,et al.  Mining social media data: How are research sponsors and researchers addressing the ethical challenges? , 2018 .

[40]  Hans Ekkehard Plesser,et al.  Reproducibility vs. Replicability: A Brief History of a Confused Terminology , 2018, Front. Neuroinform..

[41]  Marlos C. Machado,et al.  Revisiting the Arcade Learning Environment: Evaluation Protocols and Open Problems for General Agents , 2017, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[42]  Stefan Stieglitz,et al.  Social bots in a commercial context - A case study on SoundCloud , 2018, ECIS.

[43]  Tristan Henderson,et al.  Toward Reproducibility in Online Social Network Research , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing.

[44]  L. Hilton The ethics of social media , 2017 .

[45]  Matthias Carnein,et al.  Stream Clustering of Chat Messages with Applications to Twitch Streams , 2017, ER Workshops.

[46]  F. Korner‐Nievergelt,et al.  The earth is flat (p > 0.05): significance thresholds and the crisis of unreplicable research , 2017, PeerJ.

[47]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Disinformation and Social Bot Operations in the Run Up to the 2017 French Presidential Election , 2017, First Monday.

[48]  Heike Trautmann,et al.  Social Bots: Human-Like by Means of Human Control? , 2017, Big Data.

[49]  Dan Mercea,et al.  The Brexit Botnet and User-Generated Hyperpartisan News , 2017 .

[50]  Filippo Menczer,et al.  Online Human-Bot Interactions: Detection, Estimation, and Characterization , 2017, ICWSM.

[51]  Luc Van Gool,et al.  Deep Expectation of Real and Apparent Age from a Single Image Without Facial Landmarks , 2016, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[52]  Philip N. Howard,et al.  Bots, #StrongerIn, and #Brexit: Computational Propaganda during the UK-EU Referendum , 2016, ArXiv.

[53]  C. Dienemann,et al.  Transcription initiation complex structures elucidate DNA opening , 2016, Nature.

[54]  Simon Hegelich,et al.  Are Social Bots on Twitter Political Actors? Empirical Evidence from a Ukrainian Social Botnet , 2016, ICWSM.

[55]  Michael S. Bernstein,et al.  ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge , 2014, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[56]  Jimmy J. Lin,et al.  Do Multiple Listeners to the Public Twitter Sample Stream Receive the Same Tweets ? , 2015 .

[57]  F. Al-Shamali,et al.  Author Biographies. , 2015, Journal of social work in disability & rehabilitation.

[58]  D. Ruths,et al.  Social media for large studies of behavior , 2014, Science.

[59]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  Two 1%s Don't Make a Whole: Comparing Simultaneous Samples from Twitter's Streaming API , 2014, SBP.

[60]  Axel Bruns,et al.  Faster than the speed of print: Reconciling 'big data' social media analysis and academic scholarship , 2013, First Monday.

[61]  Megan A. Moreno,et al.  Ethics of Social Media Research: Common Concerns and Practical Considerations , 2013, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[62]  Huan Liu,et al.  Is the Sample Good Enough? Comparing Data from Twitter's Streaming API with Twitter's Firehose , 2013, ICWSM.

[63]  Naim Dahnoun,et al.  Studies in Computational Intelligence , 2013 .

[64]  P. Metaxas,et al.  Social Media and the Elections , 2012, Science.

[65]  Thomas Bartz-Beielstein,et al.  Experimental Methods for the Analysis of Optimization Algorithms , 2010 .

[66]  Thomas J. Johnson,et al.  The Revolution Will be Networked , 2010 .

[67]  Thomas Bartz-Beielstein,et al.  Experimental Research in Evolutionary Computation - The New Experimentalism , 2010, Natural Computing Series.

[68]  Sean M. McNee,et al.  Being accurate is not enough: how accuracy metrics have hurt recommender systems , 2006, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[69]  J. Ioannidis Why Most Published Research Findings Are False , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[70]  Gediminas Adomavicius,et al.  Toward the next generation of recommender systems: a survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[71]  Yiming Yang,et al.  RCV1: A New Benchmark Collection for Text Categorization Research , 2004, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[72]  Naren Ramakrishnan,et al.  Privacy Risks in Recommender Systems , 2001, IEEE Internet Comput..

[73]  Paul Resnick,et al.  Recommender systems , 1997, CACM.

[74]  Gary King Replication, Replication , 1995, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[75]  Ken Lang,et al.  NewsWeeder: Learning to Filter Netnews , 1995, ICML.

[76]  Jon F. Claerbout,et al.  Electronic documents give reproducible research a new meaning: 62nd Ann , 1992 .

[77]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The evolution of cooperation. , 1984, Science.

[78]  R. Lewontin ‘The Selfish Gene’ , 1977, Nature.