The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Empirical study of topic modeling in Twitter
Abstract
Social networks such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter have been a crucial source of information for a wide spectrum of users. In Twitter, popular information that is deemed important by the community propagates through the network. Studying the characteristics of content in the messages becomes important for a number of tasks, such as breaking news detection, personalized message recommendation, friends recommendation, sentiment analysis and others. While many researchers wish to use standard text mining tools to understand messages on Twitter, the restricted length of those messages prevents them from being employed to their full potential.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Introduction to information retrieval
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.46-2715 · Cited by 12,278
Griffiths, T. L., & Steyvers, M. (2004) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0307752101 · Cited by 6,049
Cited by
Comparing Twitter and Traditional Media Using Topic Models
Zhao, W. X., Jiang, J., Weng, J., He, J., Lim, E.-P., Yan, H., & Li, X. (2011) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20161-5_34 · Cited by 1,214
Is the Sample Good Enough? Comparing Data from Twitter's Streaming API with Twitter's Firehose
Morstatter, F., Pfeffer, J., Liu, H., & Carley, K. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14401 · Cited by 863
Authorship Attribution for Social Media Forensics
Rocha, A., Scheirer, W. J., Forstall, C. W., Cavalcante, T., Theophilo, A., Shen, B., Carvalho, A. R. B., & Stamatatos, E. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · doi:10.1109/tifs.2016.2603960 · Cited by 222
Emergency information diffusion on online social media during storm Cindy in U.S.
Kim, J., Bae, J., & Hastak, M. (2018) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.02.003 · Cited by 166
Lampropoulos, G., Keramopoulos, E., Diamantaras, K., & Evangelidis, G. (2022) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci12110798 · Cited by 119
Metadata
- Authors
- Hong, L., & Davison, B. D.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the First Workshop on Social Media Analytics
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2010-07-25
- Pages
- 80-88
- OpenAlex
- W2063904635
- Cited by
- 1,120
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 51.76
- 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: Empirical study of topic modeling in Twitter. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1964858.1964870
- The paper
- Hong, L., & Davison, B. D. (2010). Empirical study of topic modeling in Twitter. Proceedings of the First Workshop on Social Media Analytics. https://doi.org/10.1145/1964858.1964870
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.
