EXPERT RECOMMENDATION VIA SEMANTIC SOCIAL NETWORKS Recommandation experte via les réseaux sociaux sémantiques

The use of social network analysis (SNA) in the design of expert recommendation systems is becoming increasingly popular. However, the experts recommended from such systems often do not meet users’ needs since the network semantic information is largely ignored. In this study, we used conditional logistic analysis to quantitatively examine the semantics of two social networks in a large open source community called Ohloh. It was found that homophily in nationality, location, programming language preference, and community reputation are determinants for forming evaluation and collaboration relationships among the Ohloh members. Moreover, past collaborations and mutual acquaintances are also found to significantly affect the formation of evaluation links but not collaboration links. In addition, we demonstrated how to embed the discovered network semantics into the design of expert recommendation systems through two mechanisms - user-based link prediction and Top-N most recognized mechanism.

[1]  W. Powell,et al.  Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

[2]  Yutaka Yamauchi,et al.  Collaboration with Lean Media: how open-source software succeeds , 2000, CSCW '00.

[3]  Leonard N. Foner,et al.  Yenta: a multi-agent, referral-based matchmaking system , 1997, AGENTS '97.

[4]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[5]  Mark S. Ackerman,et al.  Expertise recommender: a flexible recommendation system and architecture , 2000, CSCW '00.

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

[7]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  A Social Network Approach to Free/Open Source Software Simulation , 2005 .

[8]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Statistical mechanics of complex networks , 2001, ArXiv.

[9]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[10]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Internet: Diameter of the World-Wide Web , 1999, Nature.

[11]  Pamela R. Haunschild,et al.  Friends or Strangers? Firm-Specific Uncertainty, Market Uncertainty, and Network Partner Selection , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[12]  B. Bollobás.  The evolution of random graphs , 1984 .

[13]  Greg Madey,et al.  THE OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT PHENOMENON: AN ANALYSIS BASED ON SOCIAL NETWORK THEORY , 2002 .

[14]  Atul Nerkar,et al.  Evolution of R&D Capabilities: The Role of Knowledge Networks Within a Firm , 2005, Manag. Sci..

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

[16]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The social structure of Open Source Software development teams , 2003 .

[17]  D. McFadden.  Econometric Models for Probabilistic Choice Among Products , 1980 .

[18]  Utpal M. Dholakia,et al.  Open Source Software User Communities: A Study of Participation in Linux User Groups , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[19]  David W. McDonald,et al.  Recommending collaboration with social networks: a comparative evaluation , 2003, CHI '03.

[20]  Bart Selman,et al.  Referral Web: combining social networks and collaborative filtering , 1997, CACM.

[21]  M. Newman,et al.  The structure of scientific collaboration networks. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  J. Coleman.  Foundations of Social Theory , 1990 .

[23]  Jin Xu,et al.  A Topological Analysis of the Open Souce Software Development Community , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

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

[25]  T. Snijders.  The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics , 2001 .

[26]  Gary L. Lilien,et al.  Location, Location, Location: How Network Embeddedness Affects Project Success in Open Source Systems , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[27]  Mark Pendergast,et al.  GROUP '05 : proceedings of the 2005 international ACM SIGGROUP conference on supporting group work : November 6-9, 2005, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA , 2005 .

[28]  Nicolas Ducheneaut,et al.  Socialization in an Open Source Software Community: A Socio-Technical Analysis , 2005, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[29]  Karim R. Lakhani,et al.  Community, Joining, and Specialization in Open Source Software Innovation: A Case Study , 2003 .

[30]  Sandra Slaughter,et al.  Communication Networks in an Open Source Software Project , 2006, OSS.

[31]  M E Newman,et al.  Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[32]  Stefan Koch,et al.  Effort, co‐operation and co‐ordination in an open source software project: GNOME , 2002, Inf. Syst. J..

[33]  R. Leenders,et al.  Evolution of friendship and best friendship choices , 1996 .

[34]  Sandra Slaughter,et al.  Understanding the Motivations, Participation, and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[35]  Magnus Bergquist,et al.  The power of gifts: organizing social relationships in open source communities , 2001, Inf. Syst. J..

[36]  Siddharth Kaza,et al.  Identifying significant facilitators of dark network evolution , 2009 .

[37]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[38]  Mark S. Ackerman,et al.  Searching for expertise in social networks: a simulation of potential strategies , 2005, GROUP.

[39]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[40]  Jeremy Boissevain,et al.  Friends of friends : networks, manipulators and coalitions , 1974 .