The DOI matches its Crossref record.
RT to Win! Predicting Message Propagation in Twitter
Open accessAbstract
Twitter is a very popular way for people to share information on a bewildering multitude of topics. Tweets are propagated using a variety of channels: by following users or lists, by searching or by retweeting. Of these vectors, retweeting is arguably the most effective, as it can potentially reach the most people, given its viral nature. A key task is predicting if a tweet will be retweeted, and solving this problem furthers our understanding of message propagation within large user communities. We carry out a human experiment on the task of deciding whether a tweet will be retweeted which shows that the task is possible, as human performance levels are much above chance. Using a machine learning approach based on the passive-aggressive algorithm, we are able to automatically predict retweets as well as humans. Analyzing the learned model, we find that performance is dominated by social features, but that tweet features add a substantial boost.
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
Cited by
Capturing Clicks: How the Chinese Government Uses Clickbait to Compete for Visibility
Lu, Y., & Pan, J. (2021) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2020.1765914 · Cited by 130
What makes cancer information viral on social media?
Wang, X., Chen, L., Shi, J., & Peng, T.-Q. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.024 · Cited by 93
On Predicting Deletions of Microblog Posts
Bagdouri, M., & Oard, D. W. (2015) · Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/2806416.2806600 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Petrovic, S., Osborne, M., & Lavrenko, V.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
- Published
- 2021-08-03
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 586-589
- ISSN
- 2162-3449 (ISSN-L)
- 2334-0770
- OpenAlex
- W2265862919
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 23.83
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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
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.
