Social tagging dynamics under system recommendation and resource multidimensionality

Abstract

Social tagging systems have attracted plenty of research endeavors recently. The dynamic models of tag generation or tag usage are one of the key subjects of inquiry. However, the existing models do not well explain the “staged” power-law distribution of tag usage frequencies as observed in various social tagging systems. To cope with this, a new tag-generation model is proposed in this paper, which is based on a preferential selection mechanism influenced by the combinatorial effects of system recommendation and resource multidimensionality. Furthermore, to validate the model, the simulative results under different parameter combinations are compared with the distributions of tag usage frequencies in datasets from three famous social tagging systems, namely Delicious.com, Last.fm and Flickr. For different categories of resources of the three systems, three tag usage patterns can be identified, namely the power-law distribution with two plateaus, the power-law distribution with one plateau, and the standard power-law distribution. All the three patterns can be well fitted and explained by the proposed model.

Keywords

Social tagging systems / tag usage patterns / dynamic model

References

[1] Cantador I., Konstas I., Jose J. M.. Categorising social tags to improve folksonomy-based recommendations. Web Semantics, 2011, 9(1): 1-15.

[2] Cattuto C., Loreto V., Pietronero L.. Semiotic dynamics and collaborative tagging. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2007, 104(5): 1461-1464.

[3] Cattuto C., Baldassarri A., Servedio V. D., Loreto V.. Emergent community structure in social tagging systems. Advances In Complex Systems, 2008, 11(4): 597-608.

[4] Cress U., Held C., Kimmerle J.. The collective knowledge of social tags: direct and indirect influences on navigation, learning, and information process-ing. Computers & Education, 2013, 60(1): 59-73.

[5] Dellschaft K., Staab S.. An epistemic dynamic model for tagging systems. Proceedings of the Nineteenth ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, 2008 71-80.

[6] Gabriel H. H., Spiliopoulou M., Nanopoulos A.. Summarizing dynamic social tagging systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 2014, 41(2): 457-469.

[7] Garcia-Silva A., Corcho O., Alani H., Gomez-Perez A.. Review of the state of the art: discovering and associating semantics to tags in folksonomies. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 2012, 27(1): 57-85.

[8] Golder S. A., Huberman B. A.. Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science, 2006, 32(2): 198-208.

[9] Gupta M., Li R., Yin Z., Han J.. Survey on social tagging techniques. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 2010, 12(1): 58-72.

[10] Hsu I.. Integrating ontology technology with folksonomies for personalized social tag recommendation. Applied Soft Computing, 2013, 13(8): 3745-3750.

[11] Lin H., Davis J., Zhou Y., et al. Aroyo L., et al. An integrated approach to extracting ontological structures from folksonomies. The Semantic Web: Research and Applications, 2009 654-668.

[12] Markines B., Cattuto C., Menczer F., Benz D., Hotho A., Stumme G.. Evaluating similarity measures for emergent semantics of social tagging. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on World Wide Web, 2009 641-650.

[13] Marlow C., Naaman M., Boyd D., Davis M.. HT06, tagging paper, taxonomy, Flickr, academic article, to read. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, 2006 31-40.

[14] Nam H., Kannan P.K.. The informational value of social tagging networks. Journal of Marketing, 2014, 78(4): 21-40.

[15] Robu V., Halpin H., Shepherd H.. Emergence of consensus and shared vocabularies in collaborative tagging systems. ACM Transactions on the Web, 2009, 3(4): 14.

[16] Shepitsen A., Gemmell J., Mobasher B., Burke R.. Personalized recommendation in social tagging systems using hierarchical clustering. Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, 2008 259-266.

[17] Sigurbjörnsson B., Van Zwol R.. Flickr tag recommendation based on collective knowledge. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on World Wide Web, 2008 327-336.

[18] Simon H. A.. On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika, 1955, 42(3-4): 425-440.

[19] Trant J.. Studying social tagging and folksonomy: a review and framework. Journal of Digital Information, 2009, 10(1): 269-278.

[20] Vandic D., Van Dam J. W., Frasincar F.. A semantic-based approach for searching and browsing tag spaces. Decision Support Systems, 2012, 54(1): 644-654.

[21] Wetzker R., Zimmermann C., Bauckhage C.. Analyzing social bookmarking systems: a Del.icio.us cookbook. Proceedings of the ECAI 2008 Mining Social Data Workshop, 2008 26-30.

[22] Yule G. U.. A mathematical theory of evolution, based on the conclusions of Dr. JC Willis, FRS, 1925 21-87.

[23] Zhang Z., Liu C.. A hypergraph model of social tagging networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2010, 2010(10): P10005.

[24] Zhou D., Bian J., Zheng S., Zha H., Giles C. L.. Exploring social annotations for information retrieval. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on World Wide Web, 2008 715-724.