Who Should I Follow? Recommending People in Directed Social Networks

Proceedings of the 5th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, ICWSM 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 458-461

  Brzozowski, Michael J ^a   Romero, Daniel M ^b  

^a HEWLETT PACKARD LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

DESIGN IMPLICATIONS; NETWORK FEATURES; NETWORK GROWTH; ORGANIC NETWORKS; SOCIAL NETWORKING SERVICES; STRUCTURAL CLOSURES; STRUCTURAL PATTERN;

COLLABORATIVE FILTERING;

EID: 85167435933     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. boyd, d. m. 2004. Friendster and publicly articulated social networking. In CHI’04: Ext. abstr. on Human factors in computing systems, 1279–1282. ACM.
2. boyd, d. 2006. Friends, friendsters, and top 8: Writing community into being on social network sites. First Monday 11(12).
3. Brzozowski, M. J. 2009. Watercooler: exploring an organization through enterprise social media. In GROUP’09: Proc. of the int. conf. on supporting group work, 219–228. ACM.
4. Chen, J.; Geyer, W.; Dugan, C.; Muller, M.; and Guy, I. 2009. Make new friends, but keep the old: recommending people on social networking sites. In CHI’09: Proc. of the int. conf. on Human factors in comput. syst., 201–210. ACM.
5. Clopper, C., and Pearson, E. S. 1934. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika 26:404–413.
6. Crandall, D.; Cosley, D.; Huttenlocher, D.; Kleinberg, J.; and Suri, S. 2008. Feedback effects between similarity and social influence in online communities. In KDD’08: Proc. of the 14th int. conf. on Knowledge discovery and data mining, 160–168. ACM.
7. Dice, L. R. 1945. Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26:297–302.
8. DiMicco, J.; Millen, D. R.; Geyer, W.; Dugan, C.; Brownholtz, B.; and Muller, M. 2008. Motivations for social networking at work. In CSCW’08: Proc. of the ACM conf. on Comp. supported coop. work, 711–720.
9. Ehrlich, K., and Shami, S. 2010. Microblogging inside and outside the workplace. In ICWSM’10: Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Weblogs and Social Media. AAAI.
10. Goldberg, D.; Nichols, D.; Oki, B. M.; and Terry, D. 1992. Using collaborative filtering to weave an information tapestry. Comm. of the ACM 35(12):61–70.
11. Golder, S. A., and Yardi, S. 2010. Structural predictors of tie formation in twitter: Transitivity and mutuality. In SocialCom’10: Proc. of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Social Computing. IEEE.
12. Granovetter, M. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78:1360–80.
13. Granovetter, M. 1983. The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory 1:201–233.
14. Guy, I.; Jacovi, M.; Perer, A.; Ronen, I.; and Uziel, E. 2010. Same places, same things, same people?: mining user similarity on social media. In CSCW’10: Proc. of the 2010 conf. on Computer supported cooperative work, 41–50. ACM.
15. Kossinets, G., and Watts, D. J. 2006. Empirical analysis of an evolving social network. Science 311(5757):88–90.
16. McPherson, M.; Smith-Lovin, L.; and Cook, J. M. 2001. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27(1):415–444.
17. van Rijsbergen, C. J. 1979. Information Retrieval. London: Butterworths.