Conditional probabilistic graphical models provide a powerful framework for structured regression in spatio-temporal datasets with complex correlation patterns. However, in real-life applications a large fraction of observations is often missing, which can severely limit the representational power of these models. In this paper we propose a Marginalized Gaussian Conditional Random Fields (m-GCRF) structured regression model for dealing with missing labels in partially observed temporal attributed graphs. This method is aimed at learning with both labeled and unlabeled parts and effectively predicting future values in a graph. The method is even capable of learning from nodes for which the response variable is never observed in history, which poses problems for many state-of-the-art models that can handle missing data. The proposed model is characterized for various missingness mechanisms on 500 synthetic graphs. The benefits of the new method are also demonstrated on a challenging application for predicting precipitation based on partial observations of climate variables in a temporal graph that spans the entire continental US. We also show that the method can be useful for optimizing the costs of data collection in climate applications via active reduction of the number of weather stations to consider. In experiments on these real-world and synthetic datasets we show that the proposed model is consistently more accurate than alternative semi-supervised structured models, as well as models that either use imputation to deal with missing values or simply ignore them altogether.
There also exist variants of the conditional graphical CRF models for regression (e.g. the CCRF @cite_19 , or GCRF @cite_18 models). However, these structured regression models are not designed to cope with unlabeled data, other than ignoring the portion of data with missing labels.
@cite_19 @cite_18
2159973364 1544526228
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. 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 selfcitation 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 ...