Understanding Types of Users on Twitter
Open accessAbstract
People use microblogging platforms like Twitter to involve with other users for a wide range of interests and practices. Twitter profiles run by different types of users such as humans, bots, spammers, businesses and professionals. This research work identifies six broad classes of Twitter users, and employs a supervised machine learning approach which uses a comprehensive set of features to classify users into the identified classes. For this purpose, we exploit users' profile and tweeting behavior information. We evaluate our approach by performing 10-fold cross validation using manually annotated 716 different Twitter profiles. High classification accuracy (measured using AUC, and precision, recall) reveals the significance of the proposed approach.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Otros estudios han usado el contenido de la biografía como insumo para tipificar usuarios o detectar clústeres en torno a un enlace de noticia.
“Otros estudios han realizado el procedimiento inverso, usando el contenido de la biografía como insumo para tipificar usuarios (Uddin et al., 2014) o detectar clústeres en torno a un enlace de una noticia del New York Times a partir de palabras reincidentes en las biografías (HerdaĞdelen et al., 2013).”
From “Vital testimonio confirm󔦔: Polarización de fuentes y redes en el Caso Catrillanca en Twitter (2021) · cites this paper as Uddin et al., 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- [1][1] F. Benevenuto, G. Magno, T. Rodrigues, and V. Almeida, 'Detecting spammers on twitter,' in Collaboration, electronic messaging, anti-abuse and spam conference (CEAS) , vol. 6, 2010. -
- [2][2] C. Castillo, M. Mendoza, and B. Poblete, 'Information credibility on twitter,' in Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web . ACM, 2011, pp. 675-684. -
- [3][3] M. Cha, H. Haddadi, F. Benevenuto, and K. P. Gummadi, 'Measuring user influence in twitter: The million follower fallacy,' in in ICWSM 10: Proceedings of international AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social , 2010. -
- [4][4] Z. Chu, S. Gianvecchio, H. Wang, and S. Jajodia, 'Detecting automation of twitter accounts: Are you a human, bot, or cyborg?' IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. , vol. 9, no. 6, Nov. 2012. -
- [5][5] A. Culotta, 'Towards detecting influenza epidemics by analyzing twitter messages,' in Proceedings of the first workshop on social media analytics . ACM, 2010, pp. 115-122. -
- [6][6] N. Dokoohaki and M. Matskin, 'Classifying twitter user interests using time series,' in Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Advances in Social 7. Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM 2013) , ser. ASONAM '13, 2013. -
- [7][7] E. Fischer and A. R. Reuber, 'Social interaction via new social media:(how) can interactions on twitter affect effectual thinking and behavior?' Journal of business venturing , vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1-18, 2011. -
- [8][8] J. Hannon, M. Bennett, and B. Smyth, 'Recommending twitter users to follow using content and collaborative filtering approaches,' in Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Recommender systems . ACM, 2010, pp. 199-206. -
- [9][9] M. Imran, C. Castillo, J. Lucas, P. Meier, and S. Vieweg, 'Aidr: Artificial intelligence for disaster response,' in Proceedings of the companion publication of the 23rd international conference on World wide web companion . International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 2014, pp. 159-162. -
- [10][10] M. Imran, S. Elbassuoni, C. Castillo, F. Diaz, and P. Meier, 'Practical extraction of disaster-relevant information from social media,' in Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on World Wide Web companion . International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 2013, pp. 1021-1024. -
- [11][11] R. Nallapati, 'Discriminative models for information retrieval,' in Proceedings of the 27th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval , ser. SIGIR '04. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2004, pp. 64-71. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1008992.1009006 - · DOI
- [13][13] M. Pennacchiotti and A.-M. Popescu, 'Democrats, republicans and starbucks afficionados: user classification in twitter,' in Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining , ser. KDD'11, 2011. -
- [15][15] D. Rao, D. Yarowsky, A. Shreevats, and M. Gupta, 'Classifying latent user attributes in twitter,' in Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Search and mining user-generated contents , ser. SMUC '10, 2010. -
- [16][16] K. Tao, F. Abel, Q. Gao, and G.-J. Houben, 'Tums: twitter-based user modeling service,' in Proceedings of the 8th international conference on The Semantic Web , ser. ESWC'11, 2012. -
- [17][17] R. Tinati, L. Carr, W. Hall, and J. Bentwood, 'Identifying communicator roles in twitter,' in Proceedings of the 21st international conference companion on World Wide Web , ser. WWW'12 Companion, 2012. -
- [18][18] A. Tumasjan, T. O. Sprenger, P. G. Sandner, and I. M. Welpe, 'Predicting elections with twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment.' ICWSM , vol. 10, pp. 178-185, 2010.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
“Vital testimonio confirm󔦔: Polarización de fuentes y redes en el Caso Catrillanca en Twitter
Santos, M. L. B., Jaramillo Castro, O., & Aguirre, D. (2021) · Cuadernos.info · doi:10.7764/cdi.49.27509 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Uddin, M. M., Imran, M., & Sajjad, H.
- Affiliations
- Qatar Foundation (QA)
- Lahore University of Management Sciences (PK)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2014
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1406.1335
- OpenAlex
- W1674228750
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Keywords
- user types, bots, spammers, business accounts, user profiles, microblogging, supervised classification
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
