↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of Link Prediction for Face-to-Face Behavioral Networks

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness of Link Prediction for Face-to-Face Behavioral Networks
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0081727
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sho Tsugawa, Hiroyuki Ohsaki

Abstract

Research on link prediction for social networks has been actively pursued. In link prediction for a given social network obtained from time-windowed observation, new link formation in the network is predicted from the topology of the obtained network. In contrast, recent advances in sensing technology have made it possible to obtain face-to-face behavioral networks, which are social networks representing face-to-face interactions among people. However, the effectiveness of link prediction techniques for face-to-face behavioral networks has not yet been explored in depth. To clarify this point, here we investigate the accuracy of conventional link prediction techniques for networks obtained from the history of face-to-face interactions among participants at an academic conference. Our findings were (1) that conventional link prediction techniques predict new link formation with a precision of 0.30-0.45 and a recall of 0.10-0.20, (2) that prolonged observation of social networks often degrades the prediction accuracy, (3) that the proposed decaying weight method leads to higher prediction accuracy than can be achieved by observing all records of communication and simply using them unmodified, and (4) that the prediction accuracy for face-to-face behavioral networks is relatively high compared to that for non-social networks, but not as high as for other types of social networks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 24%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Other 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 5 29%
Social Sciences 2 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Unknown 4 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 December 2013.
All research outputs
#18,357,514
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#154,271
of 194,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,634
of 306,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,942
of 5,294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,041 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 306,776 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.