Reputation systems concern soft security dynamics in diverse areas. Trust dynamics in a reputation system should be stable and adaptable at the same time to serve the purpose. Many reputation mechanisms have been proposed and tested over time. However, the main drawback of reputation management is that users need to share private information to gain trust in a system such as phone numbers, reviews, and ratings. Recently, a novel model that tries to overcome this issue was presented: the Dynamic Interaction-based Reputation Model (DIBRM). This approach to trust considers only implicit information automatically deduced from the interactions of users within an online community. In this primary research study, the Reddit and MathOverflow online social communities have been selected for testing DIBRM. Results show how this novel approach to trust can mimic behaviors of the selected reputation systems, namely Reddit and MathOverflow, only with temporal information.
The work by @cite_23 tested the hypothesis that temporal-based factors, such as the activity, frequency, regularity of interactions of an entity and its presence in a community, can be used as evidence of its trustworthiness. This hypothesis was tested considering Wikipedia and its content (12000 users, 94000 articles). The authors successfully demonstrated how their algorithm could identify top Wikipedia contributors similarly to the explicit barnstars' mechanism https: en.wikipedia.org wiki Wikipedia:Barnstars employed by Wikipedia. The main drawback of using this approach is the computational time required to quantify each temporal factors for each users which exponentially increases in the number of users and their interactions. To overcome this limitation, a simpler mechanism was introduced by @cite_24 . Here, the frequency of interactions among users is uniquely considered to compute their reputation. This approach was tested by employing information collected from StackOverflow https: stackoverflow.com . Findings show how this mechanism can closely approximate the reputation scores inferred by the StackOverflow mechanism.
@cite_24 @cite_23
2545641146 1988560072 2090659861 2146481439
Online knowledge repositories typically rely on their users or dedicated editors to evaluate the reliability of their contents. These explicit feedback mechanisms can be viewed as noisy measurements of both information reliability and information source trustworthiness. Can we leverage these noisy measurements, often biased, to distill a robust, unbiased and interpretable measure of both notions? In this paper, we argue that the large volume of digital traces left by the users within knowledge repositories also reflect information reliability and source trustworthiness. In particular, we propose a temporal point process modeling framework which links the temporal behavior of the users to information reliability and source trustworthiness. Furthermore, we develop an efficient convex optimization procedure to learn the parameters of the model from historical traces of the evaluations provided by these users. Experiments on real-world data gathered from Wikipedia and Stack Overflow show that our modeling framework accurately predicts evaluation events, provides an interpretable measure of information reliability and source trustworthiness, and yields interesting insights about real-world events. A large fraction of user-generated content on the Web, such as posts or comments on popular online forums, consists of abuse or spam. Due to the volume of contributions on popular sites, a few trusted moderators cannot identify all such abusive content, so viewer ratings of contributions must be used for moderation. But not all viewers who rate content are trustworthy and accurate. What is a principled approach to assigning trust and aggregating user ratings, in order to accurately identify abusive content? In this paper, we introduce a framework to address the problem of moderating online content using crowdsourced ratings. Our framework encompasses users who are untrustworthy or inaccurate to an unknown extent --- that is, both the content and the raters are of unknown quality. With no knowledge whatsoever about the raters, it is impossible to do better than a random estimate. We present efficient algorithms to accurately detect abuse that only require knowledge about the identity of a single 'good' agent, who rates contributions accurately more than half the time. We prove that our algorithm can infer the quality of contributions with error that rapidly converges to zero as the number of observations increases; we also numerically demonstrate that the algorithm has very high accuracy for much fewer observations. Finally, we analyze the robustness of our algorithms to manipulation by adversarial or strategic raters, an important issue in moderating online content, and quantify how the performance of the algorithm degrades with the number of manipulating agents. This paper introduces the problem of matching people names to their corresponding social network identities such as their Twitter accounts. Existing tools for this purpose build upon naive textual matching and inevitably suffer low precision, due to false positives (e.g., fake impersonator accounts) and false negatives (e.g., accounts using nicknames). To overcome these limitations, we leverage "relational" evidences extracted from the Web corpus. In particular, as such an example, weadopt Web document co-occurrences, which can be interpreted as an "implicit" counterpart of Twitter follower relationships. Using both textual and relational features, we learn a ranking function aggregating these features for the accurate ordering of candidate matches. Another key contribution of this paper is to formulate confidence scoring as a separate problem from relevance ranking. A baseline approach is to use the relevance of the top match itself as the confidence score. In contrast, we train a separate classifier, using not only the top relevance score but also various statistical features extracted from the relevance scores of all candidates, and empirically validate to outperform the baseline approach. We evaluate our proposed system using real-life internetscale entity-relationship and social network graphs. In this paper we investigate how temporal factors (i.e. factors computed by considering only the time-distribution of interactions) can be used as an evidence of an entity’s trustworthiness. While reputation and direct experience are the two most widely used sources of trust in applications, we believe that new sources of evidence and new applications should be investigated [1]. Moreover, while these two classical techniques are based on evaluating the outcomes of interactions (direct or indirect), temporal factors are based on quantitative analysis, representing an alternative way of assessing trust. Our presumption is that, even with this limited information, temporal factors could be a plausible evidence of trust that might be aggregated with more traditional sources. After defining our formal model of four main temporal factors - activity, presence, regularity, frequency, we performed an evaluation over the Wikipedia project, considering more than 12000 users and 94000 articles. Our encouraging results show how, based solely on temporal factors, plausible trust decisions can be achieved.