Multi-Layer Friendship Modeling for Location-Based Mobile Social Networks

  • 553 views
Uploaded on

Presented at MobiQuitous, Toronto, Canada, July 2009.

Presented at MobiQuitous, Toronto, Canada, July 2009.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
553
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Multi-Layered Friendship Modeling for Location-based Mobile Social Networks Nan Li and Guanling Chen Department of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts Lowell July 14, 2009 Toronto, Canada MobiQuitous 2009
  • 2. Online Social Network Success
    • Popular (half billion ww users)
    • Sticky (26m per day)
  • 3. OSN Goes Mobile
    • Already top Web destinations on smartphones
    • Unique feature – location
      • GPS-enabled phones
      • Sharing current location
      • Attaching location to user-generated content
    • Outlook
      • LSN >$3.3B revenue by 2013 (ABI)
    • Dodgeball, Loopt, Brightkite, Whrrl Google Latitude, Foursquare
  • 4. Brightkite
    • Startup founded 2005, Denver CO
      • Angel funding $1M, 03/2008
      • Private beta, 04/2008
      • Opened to public, 10/2008
    • User activity
      • Check in, status update, photo upload
      • All attached with current location
      • Updates through SMS, Email, Web, iPhone…
    • Social graph with mutual connection
      • See your friends’ or local activity streams
  • 5. Usage Snapshot
  • 6. Contributions
    • Data collection from Brightkite
      • 19k users; 1.5m updates
    • Quantitative correlation model for friendship
      • User tags, social graph, location/activity
    • Evaluation using 10m training data and 45d test data
      • Outperformed than Naïve Bayes classifier or J48 decision tree algorithms
  • 7. Data Collection
    • Brightkite Web APIs
    • 12/9/08-1/9/09: 18,951 active users
    • Back traced to 3/21/08: 1,505,874 updates
    • Profile: age, gender, tags , friends list
    • Social graph: 41,014 nodes and 46,172 links
    • Testing data: next 45 days had 5,098 new links added
  • 8.  
  • 9. Tag Cloud
  • 10. Basic Approach
    • Coming up metrics that
      • Differentiate friends and non-friends
      • Tags, social graph, location, activities
    • Combination of the metrics
    • Training and testing with traces
  • 11. Using Metrics
  • 12. Metric Combination
  • 13. Social Graph
  • 14. Social Graph Metric
  • 15. Tag Graph
    • 1000 most popular tags as the nodes
    • Complete graph
    • Link weight reflects likelihood of two tags shared by friends
  • 16. Tag Graph Metric
  • 17. Location Graph
  • 18. Location Graph Metric
  • 19. Rank Value Result
  • 20. Modeling Accuracy
    • Take another 100,000 non-friend pairs
      • Not in training data
    • Plus the newly added 5,098 friend pairs
    • Sort the prediction values
  • 21. ROC Curve
  • 22. Top Recommendations
  • 23. Information Gain Worldwide buzz: Planetary-scale views on an instant-messaging network. J. Leskovec and E. Horvitz, June 2007.
  • 24. Discussions
    • Model stability as Brightkite grows
      • Does not require frequent re-calculation
    • On-demand recommendation
      • Heuristics to speed up metric calculation
    • Possible improvement
      • Different metrics, or combination methods
    • “ Private” updates
      • Conjectured to be few, but no proof
  • 25. Related Work
    • Industrial solutions: Facebook, Twitter
      • Technical details unknown
    • OSN structural analysis
      • Aggregated behavior not suitable for individual recommendations
    • Collective filtering
      • User-item vs. user-user
  • 26. Conclusion
    • Correlated attribute combination has good friendship recommendation power
      • Interests, social graph, location
    • Location metric is important
      • Gender and age not so much
    • Future work
      • System implementation
      • Real-user action-based evaluation
  • 27. Acknowledgement
    • Anonymous reviewers
    • Shepherd- Sharad Agarwal
    • Best Paper Award committee