Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 236

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On community outliers and their efficient detection in information networks

Gao, Jing, Liang, Feng, Fan, Wei, Wang, Chi, Sun, Yizhou, Han, Jiawei·2010·Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining

Abstract

Linked or networked data are ubiquitous in many applications. Examples include web data or hypertext documents connected via hyperlinks, social networks or user profiles connected via friend links, co-authorship and citation information, blog data, movie reviews and so on. In these datasets (called "information networks"), closely related objects that share the same properties or interests form a community. For example, a community in blogsphere could be users mostly interested in cell phone reviews and news. Outlier detection in information networks can reveal important anomalous and interesting behaviors that are not obvious if community information is ignored. An example could be a low-income person being friends with many rich people even though his income is not anomalously low when considered over the entire population. This paper first introduces the concept of community outliers (interesting points or rising stars for a more positive sense), and then shows that well-known baseline approaches without considering links or community information cannot find these community outliers. We propose an efficient solution by modeling networked data as a mixture model composed of multiple normal communities and a set of randomly generated outliers. The probabilistic model characterizes both data and links simultaneously by defining their joint distribution based on hidden Markov random fields (HMRF). Maximizing the data likelihood and the posterior of the model gives the solution to the outlier inference problem. We apply the model on both synthetic data and DBLP data sets, and the results demonstrate importance of this concept, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed approach.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1835804.1835907

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 236

Metadata

Authors
Gao, J., Liang, F., Fan, W., Wang, C., Sun, Y., & Han, J.
Venue
Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
Publisher
ACM
Published
2010-07-25
Pages
813-822
OpenAlex
W2147620601
Cited by
236
References
4
FWCI
9.10
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On community outliers and their efficient detection in information networks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1835804.1835907
The paper
Gao, J., Liang, F., Fan, W., Wang, C., Sun, Y., & Han, J. (2010). On community outliers and their efficient detection in information networks. Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. https://doi.org/10.1145/1835804.1835907

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.