Mobile crowdsensing allows a large number of mobile devices to measure phenomena of common interests and form a body of knowledge about natural and social environments. In order to get location annotations for indoor mobile crowdsensing, reference tags are usually deployed which are susceptible to tampering and compromises by attackers. In this work, we consider three types of location-related attacks including tag forgery, tag misplacement, and tag removal. Different detection algorithms are proposed to deal with these attacks. First, we introduce location-dependent fingerprints as supplementary information for better location identification. A truth discovery algorithm is then proposed to detect falsified data. Moreover, visiting patterns are utilized for the detection of tag misplacement and removal. Experiments on both crowdsensed and emulated dataset show that the proposed algorithms can detect all three types of attacks with high accuracy.
Truth discovery is a process to integrate multi-source noisy information by estimating the reliability of each source. A comprehensive survey on truth discovery can be found at @cite_7 . Generally, a truth discovery task can be modeled in three ways: iterative methods @cite_10 , optimization based methods @cite_2 , and probabilistic graphical model based methods @cite_19 . In this work, we formulate the falsified data detection as a truth discovery problem and propose a probabilistic graphical model.
@cite_19 @cite_10 @cite_7 @cite_2
2169585110 1541280084 2408493841
Thanks to information explosion, data for the objects of interest can be collected from increasingly more sources. However, for the same object, there usually exist conflicts among the collected multi-source information. To tackle this challenge, truth discovery, which integrates multi-source noisy information by estimating the reliability of each source, has emerged as a hot topic. Several truth discovery methods have been proposed for various scenarios, and they have been successfully applied in diverse application domains. In this survey, we focus on providing a comprehensive overview of truth discovery methods, and summarizing them from different aspects. We also discuss some future directions of truth discovery research. We hope that this survey will promote a better understanding of the current progress on truth discovery, and offer some guidelines on how to apply these approaches in application domains. In the era of big data, information regarding the same objects can be collected from increasingly more sources. Unfortunately, there usually exist conflicts among the information coming from different sources. To tackle this challenge, truth discovery, i.e., to integrate multi-source noisy information by estimating the reliability of each source, has emerged as a hot topic. In many real world applications, however, the information may come sequentially, and as a consequence, the truth of objects as well as the reliability of sources may be dynamically evolving. Existing truth discovery methods, unfortunately, cannot handle such scenarios. To address this problem, we investigate the temporal relations among both object truths and source reliability, and propose an incremental truth discovery framework that can dynamically update object truths and source weights upon the arrival of new data. Theoretical analysis is provided to show that the proposed method is guaranteed to converge at a fast rate. The experiments on three real world applications and a set of synthetic data demonstrate the advantages of the proposed method over state-of-the-art truth discovery methods. In practical data integration systems, it is common for the data sources being integrated to provide conflicting information about the same entity. Consequently, a major challenge for data integration is to derive the most complete and accurate integrated records from diverse and sometimes conflicting sources. We term this challenge the truth finding problem. We observe that some sources are generally more reliable than others, and therefore a good model of source quality is the key to solving the truth finding problem. In this work, we propose a probabilistic graphical model that can automatically infer true records and source quality without any supervision. In contrast to previous methods, our principled approach leverages a generative process of two types of errors (false positive and false negative) by modeling two different aspects of source quality. In so doing, ours is also the first approach designed to merge multi-valued attribute types. Our method is scalable, due to an efficient sampling-based inference algorithm that needs very few iterations in practice and enjoys linear time complexity, with an even faster incremental variant. Experiments on two real world datasets show that our new method outperforms existing state-of-the-art approaches to the truth finding problem. Many data management applications, such as setting up Web portals, managing enterprise data, managing community data, and sharing scientific data, require integrating data from multiple sources. Each of these sources provides a set of values and different sources can often provide conflicting values. To present quality data to users, it is critical that data integration systems can resolve conflicts and discover true values. Typically, we expect a true value to be provided by more sources than any particular false one, so we can take the value provided by the majority of the sources as the truth. Unfortunately, a false value can be spread through copying and that makes truth discovery extremely tricky. In this paper, we consider how to find true values from conflicting information when there are a large number of sources, among which some may copy from others. We present a novel approach that considers dependence between data sources in truth discovery. Intuitively, if two data sources provide a large number of common values and many of these values are rarely provided by other sources (e.g., particular false values), it is very likely that one copies from the other. We apply Bayesian analysis to decide dependence between sources and design an algorithm that iteratively detects dependence and discovers truth from conflicting information. We also extend our model by considering accuracy of data sources and similarity between values. Our experiments on synthetic data as well as real-world data show that our algorithm can significantly improve accuracy of truth discovery and is scalable when there are a large number of data sources. Social networks and the Web in general are characterized by multiple information sources often claiming conflicting data values. Data veracity is hard to estimate, especially when there is no prior knowledge about the sources or the claims and in time-dependent scenarios where initially very few observers can report first information. Despite the wide set of recently proposed truth discovery approaches, "no-one-fits-all" solution emerges for estimating the veracity of on-line information in open contexts. However, analyzing the space of conflicting information and disagreeing sources might be relevant, as well as ensembling multiple truth discovery methods. This demonstration presents VERA, a Web-based platform that supports information extraction from Web textual data and micro-texts from Twitter and estimates data veracity. Given a user query, VERA systematically extracts entities and relations from Web content, structures them as claims relevant to the query and gathers more conflicting corroborating information. VERA combines multiple truth discovery algorithms through ensembling returns the veracity label and score of each data value and the trustworthiness scores of the sources. VERA will be demonstrated through several real-world scenarios to show its potential value for fact-checking from Web data. A citing sentence is one that appears in a scientific article and cites previous work. Citing sentences have been studied and used in many applications. For example, they have been used in scientific paper summarization, automatic survey generation, paraphrase identification, and citation function classification. Citing sentences that cite multiple papers are common in scientific writing. This observation should be taken into consideration when using citing sentences in applications. For instance, when a citing sentence is used in a summary of a scientific paper, only the fragments of the sentence that are relevant to the summarized paper should be included in the summary. In this paper, we present and compare three different approaches for identifying the fragments of a citing sentence that are related to a given target reference. Our methods are: word classification, sequence labeling, and segment classification. Our experiments show that segment classification achieves the best results. Abstract Documents in computer-readable form can be used to provide information about other documents, i.e. those they cite. To do this efficiently requires procedures for computer recognition of citing statements. This is not easy, especially for multi-sentence citing statements. Computer recognition procedures have been developed which are accurate to the following extent: 73 of the words in statements selected by computer procedures as being citing statements are words which are correctly attributable to the corresponding documents. The retrieval effectiveness of computer-recognized citing statements was tested in the following way. First, for eight retrieval requests in inorganiic chemistry, average recall by search of Chemical Abstracts Service indexing and Chemical Abstracts abstract text words was found to be 50 . Words from citing statements referring to the papers to be retrieved were then added to the index terms and abstract words as additional access points, and searching was repeated. Average recall increased to 70 . Only words from citing statements published within a year of the cited papers were used. The retrieval effect of citing statement words alone (published within a year) without index or abstract terms was the following: average recall was 40 . When just the words of the titles of the cited papers were added to those citing statement words, average recall increased to 50 . In a document network such as a citation network of scientific documents, web-logs, etc., the content produced by authors exhibits their interest in certain topics. In addition some authors influence other authors' interests. In this work, we propose to model the influence of cited authors along with the interests of citing authors. Moreover, we hypothesize that apart from the citations present in documents, the context surrounding the citation mention provides extra topical information about the cited authors. However, associating terms in the context to the cited authors remains an open problem. We propose novel document generation schemes that incorporate the context while simultaneously modeling the interests of citing authors and influence of the cited authors. Our experiments show significant improvements over baseline models for various evaluation criteria such as link prediction between document and cited author, and quantitatively explaining unseen text. There is an increasing amount of false claims in news, social media, and other web sources. While prior work on truth discovery has focused on the case of checking factual statements, this paper addresses the novel task of assessing the credibility of arbitrary claims made in natural-language text - in an open-domain setting without any assumptions about the structure of the claim, or the community where it is made. Our solution is based on automatically finding sources in news and social media, and feeding these into a distantly supervised classifier for assessing the credibility of a claim (i.e., true or fake). For inference, our method leverages the joint interaction between the language of articles about the claim and the reliability of the underlying web sources. Experiments with claims from the popular website snopes.com and from reported cases of Wikipedia hoaxes demonstrate the viability of our methods and their superior accuracy over various baselines. A new form of document coupling called co-citation is defined as the frequency with which two documents are cited together. The co-citation frequency of two scientific papers can be determined by comparing lists of citing documents in the Science Citation Index and counting identical entries. Networks of co-cited papers can be generated for specific scientific specialties, and an example is drawn from the literature of particle physics. Co-citation patterns are found to differ significantly from bibliographic coupling patterns, but to agree generally with patterns of direct citation. Clusters of co-cited papers provide a new way to study the specialty structure of science. They may provide a new approach to indexing and to the creation of SDI profiles. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations.Design methodology approach – ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets – a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self‐citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation – using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database.Findings – ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited ... Citation relationship between scientific publications has been successfully used for scholarly bibliometrics, information retrieval and data mining tasks, and citation-based recommendation algorithms are well documented. While previous studies investigated citation relations from various viewpoints, most of them share the same assumption that, if paper1 cites paper2 (or author1 cites author2), they are connected, regardless of citation importance, sentiment, reason, topic, or motivation. However, this assumption is oversimplified. In this study, we employ an innovative "context-rich heterogeneous network" approach, which paves a new way for citation recommendation task. In the network, we characterize 1) the importance of citation relationships between citing and cited papers, and 2) the topical citation motivation. Unlike earlier studies, the citation information, in this paper, is characterized by citation textual contexts extracted from the full-text citing paper. We also propose algorithm to cope with the situation when large portion of full-text missing information exists in the bibliographic repository. Evaluation results show that, context-rich heterogeneous network can significantly enhance the citation recommendation performance. Scholars are increasingly citing electronic “web references” which are not preserved in libraries or full text archives. WebCite is a new standard for citing web references. To “webcite” a document involves archiving the cited Web page through www.webcitation.org and citing the WebCite permalink instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live Web page. This journal has amended its “instructions for authors” accordingly, asking authors to archive cited Web pages before submitting a manuscript. Almost 200 other journals are already using the system. We discuss the rationale for WebCite, its technology, and how scholars, editors, and publishers can benefit from the service. Citing scholars initiate an archiving process of all cited Web references, ideally before they submit a manuscript. Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on their Web document(s). Editors should ask their authors to cache all cited Web addresses (Uniform Resource Locators, or URLs) “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to their journal. Editors and publishers should also instruct their copyeditors to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already. Finally, WebCite can process publisher submitted “citing articles” (submitted for example as eXtensible Markup Language [XML] documents) to automatically archive all cited Web pages shortly before or on publication. Finally, WebCite can act as a focussed crawler, caching retrospectively references of already published articles. Copyright issues are addressed by honouring respective Internet standards (robot exclusion files, no-cache and no-archive tags). Long-term preservation is ensured by agreements with libraries and digital preservation organizations. The resulting WebCite Index may also have applications for research assessment exercises, being able to measure the impact of Web services and published Web documents through access and Web citation metrics. @PARASPLIT [J Med Internet Res 2005;7(5):e60] The discovery of causal relationships from purely observational data is a fundamental problem in science. The most elementary form of such a causal discovery problem is to decide whether X causes Y or, alternatively, Y causes X, given joint observations of two variables X,Y. An example is to decide whether altitude causes temperature, or vice versa, given only joint measurements of both variables. Even under the simplifying assumptions of no confounding, no feedback loops, and no selection bias, such bivariate causal discovery problems are challenging. Nevertheless, several approaches for addressing those problems have been proposed in recent years. We review two families of such methods: methods based on Additive Noise Models (ANMs) and Information Geometric Causal Inference (IGCI). We present the benchmark CAUSEEFFECTPAIRS that consists of data for 100 different causee ffect pairs selected from 37 data sets from various domains (e.g., meteorology, biology, medicine, engineering, economy, etc.) and motivate our decisions regarding the "ground truth" causal directions of all pairs. We evaluate the performance of several bivariate causal discovery methods on these real-world benchmark data and in addition on artificially simulated data. Our empirical results on real-world data indicate that certain methods are indeed able to distinguish cause from effect using only purely observational data, although more benchmark data would be needed to obtain statistically significant conclusions. One of the best performing methods overall is the method based on Additive Noise Models that has originally been proposed by (2009), which obtains an accuracy of 63 ± 10 and an AUC of 0.74 ± 0.05 on the real-world benchmark. As the main theoretical contribution of this work we prove the consistency of that method. The research challenge addressed in this paper is to devise effective techniques for identifying task-based sessions, i.e. sets of possibly non contiguous queries issued by the user of a Web Search Engine for carrying out a given task. In order to evaluate and compare different approaches, we built, by means of a manual labeling process, a ground-truth where the queries of a given query log have been grouped in tasks. Our analysis of this ground-truth shows that users tend to perform more than one task at the same time, since about 75 of the submitted queries involve a multi-tasking activity. We formally define the Task-based Session Discovery Problem (TSDP) as the problem of best approximating the manually annotated tasks, and we propose several variants of well known clustering algorithms, as well as a novel efficient heuristic algorithm, specifically tuned for solving the TSDP. These algorithms also exploit the collaborative knowledge collected by Wiktionary and Wikipedia for detecting query pairs that are not similar from a lexical content point of view, but actually semantically related. The proposed algorithms have been evaluated on the above ground-truth, and are shown to perform better than state-of-the-art approaches, because they effectively take into account the multi-tasking behavior of users. In this work, we address the problem of joint modeling of text and citations in the topic modeling framework. We present two different models called the Pairwise-Link-LDA and the Link-PLSA-LDA models. The Pairwise-Link-LDA model combines the ideas of LDA [4] and Mixed Membership Block Stochastic Models [1] and allows modeling arbitrary link structure. However, the model is computationally expensive, since it involves modeling the presence or absence of a citation (link) between every pair of documents. The second model solves this problem by assuming that the link structure is a bipartite graph. As the name indicates, Link-PLSA-LDA model combines the LDA and PLSA models into a single graphical model. Our experiments on a subset of Citeseer data show that both these models are able to predict unseen data better than the baseline model of Erosheva and Lafferty [8], by capturing the notion of topical similarity between the contents of the cited and citing documents. Our experiments on two different data sets on the link prediction task show that the Link-PLSA-LDA model performs the best on the citation prediction task, while also remaining highly scalable. In addition, we also present some interesting visualizations generated by each of the models. Algorithms that favor popular items are used to help us select among many choices, from top-ranked search engine results to highly-cited scientific papers. The goal of these algorithms is to identify high-quality items such as reliable news, credible information sources, and important discoveries–in short, high-quality content should rank at the top. Prior work has shown that choosing what is popular may amplify random fluctuations and lead to sub-optimal rankings. Nonetheless, it is often assumed that recommending what is popular will help high-quality content “bubble up” in practice. Here we identify the conditions in which popularity may be a viable proxy for quality content by studying a simple model of a cultural market endowed with an intrinsic notion of quality. A parameter representing the cognitive cost of exploration controls the trade-off between quality and popularity. Below and above a critical exploration cost, popularity bias is more likely to hinder quality. But we find a narrow intermediate regime of user attention where an optimal balance exists: choosing what is popular can help promote high-quality items to the top. These findings clarify the effects of algorithmic popularity bias on quality outcomes, and may inform the design of more principled mechanisms for techno-social cultural markets. Activity recognition in smart environment has been investigated rigorously in recent years. Researchers are enhancing the underlying activity discovery and recognition process by adding various dimensions and functionalities. But one significant barrier still persists which is collecting the ground truth information. Ground truth is very important to initialize a supervised learning of activities. Due to a large variety in number of Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), acknowledging them in a supervised way is a non-trivial research problem. Most of the previous researches have referenced a subset of ADLs and to initialize their model, they acquire a vast amount of informative labeled training data. On the other hand to collect ground truth and differentiate ADLs, human intervention is indispensable. As a result it takes an immense effort and raises privacy concerns to collect a reasonable amount of labeled data. In this paper, we propose to use active learning to alleviate the labeling effort and ground truth data collection in activity recognition pipeline. We investigate and analyze different active learning strategies to scale activity recognition and propose a dynamic k-means clustering based active learning approach. Experimental results on real data traces from a retirement community-(IRB #HP-00064387) help validate the early promise of our approach. Historically, papers have been physically bound to the journal in which they were published; but in the digital age papers are available individually, no longer tied to their respective journals. Hence, papers now can be read and cited based on their own merits, independently of the journal's physical availability, reputation, or impact factor (IF). We compare the strength of the relationship between journals' IFs and the actual citations received by their respective papers from 1902 to 2009. Throughout most of the 20th century, papers' citation rates were increasingly linked to their respective journals' IFs. However, since 1990, the advent of the digital age, the relation between IFs and paper citations has been weakening. This began first in physics, a field that was quick to make the transition into the electronic domain. Furthermore, since 1990 the overall proportion of highly cited papers coming from highly cited journals has been decreasing and, of these highly cited papers, the proportion not coming from highly cited journals has been increasing. Should this pattern continue, it might bring an end to the use of the IF as a way to evaluate the quality of journals, papers, and researchers. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. A Hilbert space embedding of a distribution---in short, a kernel mean embedding---has recently emerged as a powerful tool for machine learning and inference. The basic idea behind this framework is to map distributions into a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) in which the whole arsenal of kernel methods can be extended to probability measures. It can be viewed as a generalization of the original "feature map" common to support vector machines (SVMs) and other kernel methods. While initially closely associated with the latter, it has meanwhile found application in fields ranging from kernel machines and probabilistic modeling to statistical inference, causal discovery, and deep learning. The goal of this survey is to give a comprehensive review of existing work and recent advances in this research area, and to discuss the most challenging issues and open problems that could lead to new research directions. The survey begins with a brief introduction to the RKHS and positive definite kernels which forms the backbone of this survey, followed by a thorough discussion of the Hilbert space embedding of marginal distributions, theoretical guarantees, and a review of its applications. The embedding of distributions enables us to apply RKHS methods to probability measures which prompts a wide range of applications such as kernel two-sample testing, independent testing, and learning on distributional data. Next, we discuss the Hilbert space embedding for conditional distributions, give theoretical insights, and review some applications. The conditional mean embedding enables us to perform sum, product, and Bayes' rules---which are ubiquitous in graphical model, probabilistic inference, and reinforcement learning---in a non-parametric way. We then discuss relationships between this framework and other related areas. Lastly, we give some suggestions on future research directions.