Will Triadic Closure Strengthen Ties in Social Networks?

The social triad—a group of three people—is one of the simplest and most fundamental social groups. Extensive network and social theories have been developed to understand its structure, such as triadic closure and social balance. Over the course of a triadic closure—the transition from two ties to three among three users, the strength dynamics of its social ties, however, are much less well understood. Using two dynamic networks from social media and mobile communication, we examine how the formation of the third tie in a triad affects the strength of the existing two ties. Surprisingly, we find that in about 80% social triads, the strength of the first two ties is weakened although averagely the tie strength in the two networks maintains an increasing or stable trend. We discover that (1) the decrease in tie strength among three males is more sharply than that among females, and (2) the tie strength between celebrities is more likely to be weakened as the closure of a triad than those between ordinary people. Furthermore, we formalize a triadic tie strength dynamics prediction problem to infer whether social ties of a triad will become weakened after its closure. We propose a TRIST method—a kernel density estimation (KDE)-based graphical model—to solve the problem by incorporating user demographics, temporal effects, and structural information. Extensive experiments demonstrate that TRIST offers a greater than 82% potential predictability for inferring triadic tie strength dynamics in both networks. The leveraging of the KDE and structural correlations enables TRIST to outperform baselines by up to 30% in terms of F1-score.

[1]  F. Heider The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[2]  Brendan J. Frey,et al.  Factor graphs and the sum-product algorithm , 2001, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[3]  Eric Gilbert,et al.  Predicting tie strength in a new medium , 2012, CSCW.

[4]  S. V. N. Vishwanathan,et al.  Graph kernels , 2007 .

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

[6]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Microscopic evolution of social networks , 2008, KDD.

[7]  T. Caplow,et al.  Two against One. Coalitions in Triads , 1970 .

[8]  S. Haykin Kalman Filtering and Neural Networks , 2001 .

[9]  Jimeng Sun,et al.  StructInf: Mining Structural Influence from Social Streams , 2017, AAAI.

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

[11]  R. Lazarus,et al.  The health-related functions of social support , 1981, Journal of Behavioral Medicine.

[12]  Stefan Thurner,et al.  Triadic closure dynamics drives scaling laws in social multiplex networks , 2013, 1301.0259.

[13]  Jennifer Neville,et al.  Modeling relationship strength in online social networks , 2010, WWW '10.

[14]  P. V. Marsden,et al.  Measuring Tie Strength , 1984 .

[15]  Nitesh V. Chawla,et al.  Link Prediction and Recommendation across Heterogeneous Social Networks , 2012, 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Data Mining.

[16]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  The Directed Closure Process in Hybrid Social-Information Networks, with an Analysis of Link Formation on Twitter , 2010, ICWSM.

[17]  Francis R. Bach,et al.  Graph kernels between point clouds , 2007, ICML '08.

[18]  Mark S. Granovetter Getting a Job: A Study of Contacts and Careers , 1974 .

[19]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Growing closer on facebook: changes in tie strength through social network site use , 2014, CHI.

[20]  P.J. Denning,et al.  On learning how to predict , 1980, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[21]  Wei Chen,et al.  Diffusion of “Following” Links in Microblogging Networks , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[22]  Luca Becchetti,et al.  Efficient semi-streaming algorithms for local triangle counting in massive graphs , 2008, KDD.

[23]  M. Goodchild,et al.  Spatial, temporal, and socioeconomic patterns in the use of Twitter and Flickr , 2013 .

[24]  Chi-Yin Chow,et al.  iGSLR: personalized geo-social location recommendation: a kernel density estimation approach , 2013, SIGSPATIAL/GIS.

[25]  S. Leinhardt,et al.  The Structure of Positive Interpersonal Relations in Small Groups. , 1967 .

[26]  Theodore Caplow,et al.  Two Against One: Coalitions in Triads. , 1970 .

[27]  Jie Gao,et al.  Predicting group stability in online social networks , 2013, WWW.

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

[29]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Factorial Hidden Markov Models , 1995, Machine Learning.

[30]  Panayiotis Tsaparas,et al.  Using strong triadic closure to characterize ties in social networks , 2014, KDD.

[31]  X. Jin Factor graphs and the Sum-Product Algorithm , 2002 .

[32]  Ben Y. Zhao,et al.  Link and Triadic Closure Delay: Temporal Metrics for Social Network Dynamics , 2014, ICWSM.

[33]  G. Simmel The sociology of Georg Simmel , 1950 .

[34]  Kurt Mehlhorn,et al.  Efficient graphlet kernels for large graph comparison , 2009, AISTATS.

[35]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Signed networks in social media , 2010, CHI.

[36]  Hosung Park,et al.  What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? , 2010, WWW '10.

[37]  Nitesh V. Chawla,et al.  Structural Diversity and Homophily: A Study Across More Than One Hundred Big Networks , 2016, KDD.

[38]  Malte Doehne,et al.  Krackhardt (1999): The Ties That Torture: Simmelian Tie Analysis in Organizations , 2018, Schlüsselwerke der Netzwerkforschung.

[39]  Larry Wasserman,et al.  All of Statistics: A Concise Course in Statistical Inference , 2004 .

[40]  Lisa Handke,et al.  Heider (1958): The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations , 2018, Schlüsselwerke der Netzwerkforschung.

[41]  Nitesh V. Chawla,et al.  Structural Diversity and Homophily: A Study Across More than One Hundred Large-Scale Networks , 2016, ArXiv.

[42]  Larry Wasserman,et al.  All of Statistics , 2004 .

[43]  Xiaoming Fu,et al.  Mining triadic closure patterns in social networks , 2014, WWW.

[44]  Kun Li,et al.  A coevolving model based on preferential triadic closure for social media networks , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[45]  Christopher J. Fariss,et al.  Inferring Tie Strength from Online Directed Behavior , 2013, PloS one.

[46]  Jie Tang,et al.  Learning to predict reciprocity and triadic closure in social networks , 2013, TKDD.

[47]  Xiaoming Fu,et al.  Triadic Closure Pattern Analysis and Prediction in Social Networks , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[48]  Jie Tang,et al.  Uncovering the Formation of Triadic Closure in Social Networks , 2015, IJCAI.

[49]  Matthew S. Gerber,et al.  Predicting crime using Twitter and kernel density estimation , 2014, Decis. Support Syst..

[50]  Jari Saramäki,et al.  Persistence of social signatures in human communication , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[51]  J. M. Hammersley,et al.  Markov fields on finite graphs and lattices , 1971 .

[52]  Nitesh V. Chawla,et al.  Inferring user demographics and social strategies in mobile social networks , 2014, KDD.

[53]  Eric Gilbert,et al.  Predicting tie strength with social media , 2009, CHI.

[54]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Planetary-scale views on a large instant-messaging network , 2008, WWW.