The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Who Influenced You? Predicting Retweet via Social Influence Locality
Abstract
Social influence occurs when one’s opinions, emotions, or behaviors are affected by others in a social network. However, social influence takes many forms, and its underlying mechanism is still unclear. For example, how is one’s behavior influenced by a group of friends who know each other and by the friends from different ego friend circles? In this article, we study the social influence problem in a large microblogging network. Particularly, we consider users’ (re)tweet behaviors and focus on investigating how friends in one’s ego network influence retweet behaviors. We propose a novel notion of social influence locality and develop two instantiation functions based on pairwise influence and structural diversity. The defined influence locality functions have strong predictive power. Without any additional features, we can obtain an F1-score of 71.65% for predicting users’ retweet behaviors by training a logistic regression classifier based on the defined influence locality functions. We incorporate social influence locality into a factor graph model, which can further leverage the network-based correlation. Our experiments on the large microblogging network show that the model significantly improves the precision of retweet prediction. Our analysis also reveals several intriguing discoveries. For example, if you have six friends retweeting a microblog, the average likelihood that you will also retweet it strongly depends on the structure among the six friends: The likelihood will significantly drop (only ⅙) when the six friends do not know each other, compared with the case when the six friends know each other.
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
Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference
Pearl, J. (2009) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803161 · Cited by 11,653
A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization
Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J. H. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11421 · Cited by 2,575
Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks
Aral, S., Muchnik, L., & Sundararajan, A. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0908800106 · Cited by 1,207
Cited by
DeepInf: Social Influence Prediction with Deep Learning
Qiu, J., Tang, J., Ma, H., Dong, Y., Wang, K., & Tang, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3219819.3220077 · Cited by 587
Self-citationDynamics of information diffusion and its applications on complex networks
Zhang, Z.-K., Liu, C., Zhan, X.-X., Lu, X., Zhang, C.-X., & Zhang, Y.-C. (2016) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.07.002 · Cited by 484
S3: Social-network Simulation System with Large Language Model-Empowered Agents
Gao, C., Lan, X., Lu, Z., Mao, J., Piao, J., Wang, H., Jin, D., & Li, Y. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4607026 · Cited by 113
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, J., Tang, J., Li, J., Liu, Y., & Xing, C.
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data
- Published
- 2015-04
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1-26
- ISSN
- 1556-4681 (ISSN-L)
- 1556-472X
- OpenAlex
- W2094948131
- Cited by
- 199
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 8.98
- Type
- journal article
- 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: Who Influenced You? Predicting Retweet via Social Influence Locality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/2700398
- The paper
- Zhang, J., Tang, J., Li, J., Liu, Y., & Xing, C. (2015). Who Influenced You? Predicting Retweet via Social Influence Locality. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data. https://doi.org/10.1145/2700398
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.