Applying social network analysis to Parliamentary Proceedings
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


Applying social network analysis to Parliamentary Proceedings



Automatic discovery of meaningful cliques

Automatic discovery of meaningful cliques



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 2 1 1


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Applying social network analysis to Parliamentary Proceedings Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Applying social network analysisto Parliamentary ProceedingsAutomatic discovery of meaningful cliquesAuthor:Justin van WeesSupervisors:Dr. Maarten MarxDr. Johan van DoornikJune 23, 2011
  • 2. Why?Motivation and research question
  • 3. Research question Can we discover communities of politicians that debate on a speci c policy area? Motivation• It’s unknown which member is responsible for a certain policy area• Discover what issues are discussed within a policy area• Serve as example application of social network analysis techniques
  • 4. How?Background and methodology
  • 5. <root> <docinfo>...</docinfo> <meta>...</meta> <proceedings> <topic> <scene type="speaker" speaker="Hamer" party="PvdA" function="Mevrouw" role="mp" title="Mevrouw Hamer (PvdA)" MPid="02221"> <speech party="PvdA" speaker="Hamer" function="Mevrouw" role="mp" MPid="02221"> <p>Dat is helemaal niet waar. U bewijst nu voor de derde keer dat u niet ...</p> </speech> <speech type="interruption" party="Verdonk" speaker="Verdonk" function="Mevrouw" role="mp" MPid="02995"> <p>Mag ik even uitpraten? Dank u. Zo werkt dat, gewoon fatsoen. Dank u wel. [...]</p> </speech> </scence> </topic> </proceedings></root>
  • 6. A simple graph
  • 7. A directed graph
  • 8. 42 32 21 12 84 100 10 8 15A weighted directed graph
  • 9. .8&&%9":3()(;&/%3<"3=()(,- 8 456",,%#()(+77()(,- 8 2 4 !"#$%&()(**+()(,- 24,"2()(B1$A()(,- >":#%1%#$)456/?2%3()(@+A()(,- .//0%&1/&2()(0/1%&3,%32 A single debate represented in a graph
  • 10. Debates during Cabinet Kok II
  • 11. A community A group of nodes that are relatively denselyconnected to each other but sparsely connected to other dense groups in the network
  • 12. A k-clique (k = 4) K-clique communities (k = 4)
  • 13. Finding issues that a community is discussing• Retrieve all ‘community text’• Tokenized at word level• Lemmatize• Use parsimonious language models to nd most ‘descriptive’ terms
  • 14. What?Results and conclusion
  • 15. General network statistics of Kok II No distinction With distinction between MP/MG between MP/MG roles rolesNodes 211 218Edges 3594 3615Density 0,081 0,076
  • 16. Finding k-clique communties• By default, found groups are note ‘cohesive’• Filter out ‘noise’ by setting a threshold on edge weights• At 15 interruptions: 197 nodes, 741 edges, 31 k-clique communities
  • 17. Finding k-clique communties• All k-clique communities could be traced back to a single policy area• Except for more ‘general’ policy areas• 92% of the community members directly related to the policy area covered by the community• 85% of top 20 ‘issue terms’ relevant to policy area• K-clique community detection and parsimonious language models are successful methods for automatic discovery of communities within debate networks
  • 18. Discussion... and future research
  • 19. • Method for setting edge weight threshold• Reviewing of k-cliques done by single person• Used four years of data, shorter time-window possible?• Focused on Cabinet Kok II, what about other (earlier) cabinets?• Completely different data?
  • 20. Questions?For detailed results, datasets and programs see: