arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 1909.03543cs.SIphysics.soc-ph
收藏

社交网络结构多样性的实验研究

An Experimental Study of Structural Diversity in Social Networks

Jessica Su, Krishna Kamath, Aneesh Sharma, Johan Ugander, Sharad Goel

摘要:

最近几项关于在线社交网络平台的研究发现,采用率和参与度与结构多样性呈正相关,结构多样性是指个人联系人之间的异质性程度,由网络关系衡量。这种观察的一个常见理论是,结构多样性增加了效用,部分原因是在同一平台上与来自不同网络组件的人进行交互是有价值的。虽然令人信服,但这种因果理论的证据来自观察研究,因此很难排除非因果解释。我们通过在Twitter平台上进行大规模随机对照研究,探讨结构多样性对保留的作用。我们首先表明,结构多样性与Twitter上的用户保留相关,证实了过去的观察性研究的结果。然后,我们通过改变新用户加入平台时看到的网络推荐集来改变结构多样性;我们确认这种设计会引起网络拓扑的预期变化。然而,我们发现,在我们的实验中,低,中,高结构多样性的治疗组具有可比的保留率。因此,至少在这种情况下,观察到的结构多样性和保留之间的相关性似乎不是因果关系的结果,挑战了基于过去观察研究的理论。

英文摘要:

Several recent studies of online social networking platforms have found that adoption rates and engagement levels are positively correlated with structural diversity, the degree of heterogeneity among an individual's contacts as measured by network ties. One common theory for this observation is that structural diversity increases utility, in part because there is value to interacting with people from different network components on the same platform. While compelling, evidence for this causal theory comes from observational studies, making it difficult to rule out non-causal explanations. We investigate the role of structural diversity on retention by conducting a large-scale randomized controlled study on the Twitter platform. We first show that structural diversity correlates with user retention on Twitter, corroborating results from past observational studies. We then exogenously vary structural diversity by altering the set of network recommendations new users see when joining the platform; we confirm that this design induces the desired changes to network topology. We find, however, that low, medium, and high structural diversity treatment groups in our experiment have comparable retention rates. Thus, at least in this case, the observed correlation between structural diversity and retention does not appear to result from a causal relationship, challenging theories based on past observational studies.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑