Recent research has shown a substantial active presence of bots in online social networks (OSNs). In this paper we utilise our past work on studying bots (Stweeler) to comparatively analyse the usage and impact of bots and humans on Twitter, one of the largest OSNs in the world. We collect a large-scale Twitter dataset and define various metrics based on tweet metadata. We divide and filter the dataset in four popularity groups in terms of number of followers. Using a human annotation task we assign 'bot' and 'human' ground-truth labels to the dataset, and compare the annotations against an online bot detection tool for evaluation. We then ask a series of questions to discern important behavioural bot and human characteristics using metrics within and among four popularity groups. From the comparative analysis we draw important differences as well as surprising similarities between the two entities, thus paving the way for reliable classification of automated political infiltration, advertisement campaigns, and general bot detection.
Unlike these works, we do not aim to monitor the success of bot infiltration. Rather we are interested in understanding the behavioural differences of bots and humans. That said, there is work that has inspected bot or human behaviour in isolation. For example, @cite_6 examined the retweet behaviour of people, focussing on how people tweet , as well as why and what people retweet . The authors found that participants retweet using different styles, and for diverse reasons ( for others or for social action). This is relevant to our own work, as we also study retweets. In contrast, we directly compare retweet patterns of bots and humans (rather than just humans).
@cite_6
1996359281 2809692089 2406116889 1999458239
Human behaviour is highly individual by nature, yet statistical structures are emerging which seem to govern the actions of human beings collectively. Here we search for universal statistical laws dictating the timing of human actions in communication decisions. We focus on the distribution of the time interval between messages in human broadcast communication, as documented in Twitter, and study a collection of over 160,000 tweets for three user categories: personal (controlled by one person), managed (typically PR agency controlled) and bot-controlled (automated system). To test our hypothesis, we investigate whether it is possible to differentiate between user types based on tweet timing behaviour, independently of the content in messages. For this purpose, we developed a system to process a large amount of tweets for reality mining and implemented two simple probabilistic inference algorithms: 1. a naive Bayes classifier, which distinguishes between two and three account categories with classification performance of 84.6 and 75.8 , respectively and 2. a prediction algorithm to estimate the time of a user's next tweet with an . Our results show that we can reliably distinguish between the three user categories as well as predict the distribution of a user's inter-message time with reasonable accuracy. More importantly, we identify a characteristic power-law decrease in the tail of inter-message time distribution by human users which is different from that obtained for managed and automated accounts. This result is evidence of a universal law that permeates the timing of human decisions in broadcast communication and extends the findings of several previous studies of peer-to-peer communication. Twitter has increasingly become a popular platform to share news and user opinion. A tweet is considered to be important if it receives high number of affirmative reactions from other Twitter users via Retweets. Retweet count is thus considered as a surrogate measure for positive crowd-sourced reactions - high number of retweets of a tweet not only help the tweet being broadcasted, but also aid in making its topic trending. This in turn bolsters the social reputation of the author of the tweet. Since social reputation impact of users t weets influences many decisions (such as promoting brands, advertisement etc.), several blackmarket syndicates have actively been engaged in producing fake retweets in a collusive manner. Users who want to boost the impact of their tweets approach the blackmarket services, and gain retweets for their own tweets by retweeting other customers' tweets. Thus they become customers of blackmarket syndicates and engage in fake activities. Interestingly, these customers are neither bots, nor even fake users - they are usually normal human beings; they express a mix of organic and inorganic retweeting activities, and there is no synchronicity across their behaviors. In this paper, we make a first attempt to investigate such blackmarket customers engaged in producing fake retweets. We collected and annotated a novel dataset comprising of customers of many blackmarket services and characterize them using a set of 64 novel features. We show how their social behavior differs from genuine users. We then use state-of-the-art supervised models to detect three types of customers (bots, promotional, normal) and genuine users. We achieve a Macro Fl-score of 0.87 with SVM, outperforming four other baselines significantly. We further design a browser extension, SCoRe which, given the link of a tweet, spots its fake retweeters in real-time. We also collected users' feedback on the performance of SCoRe and obtained 85 accuracy. Twitter and other microblogs have rapidly become a significant means by which people communicate with the world and each other in near realtime. There has been a large number of studies surrounding these social media, focusing on areas such as information spread, various centrality measures, topic detection and more. However, one area which has not received much attention is trying to better understand what information is being spread and why it is being spread. This work looks to get a better understanding of what makes people spread information in tweets or microblogs through the use of retweeting. Several retweet behavior models are presented and evaluated on a Twitter data set consisting of over 768,000 tweets gathered from monitoring over 30,000 users for a period of one month. We evaluate the proposed models against each user and show how people use different retweet behavior models. For example, we find that although users in the majority of cases do not retweet information on topics that they themselves Tweet about as or from people who are "like them" (hence anti-homophily), we do find that models which do take homophily, or similarity, into account fits the observed retweet behaviors much better than other more general models which do not take this into account. We further find that, not surprisingly, people's retweeting behavior is better explained through multiple different models rather than one model. Most previous analysis of Twitter user behavior has focused on individual information cascades and the social followers graph, in which the nodes for two users are connected if one follows the other. We instead study aggregate user behavior and the retweet graph with a focus on quantitative descriptions. We find that the lifetime tweet distribution is a type-II discrete Weibull stemming from a power law hazard function, that the tweet rate distribution, although asymptotically power law, exhibits a lognormal cutoff over finite sample intervals, and that the inter-tweet interval distribution is a power law with exponential cutoff. The retweet graph is small-world and scale-free, like the social graph, but less disassortative and has much stronger clustering. These differences are consistent with it better capturing the real-world social relationships of and trust between users than the social graph. Beyond just understanding and modeling human communication patterns and social networks, applications for alternative, decentralized microblogging systems---both predicting real-word performance and detecting spam---are discussed.