skip to main content
research-article

Inferring Social Strength from Spatiotemporal Data

Authors Info & Claims
Published:18 March 2016Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The advent of geolocation technologies has generated unprecedented rich datasets of people’s location information at a very high fidelity. These location datasets can be used to study human behavior; for example, social studies have shown that people who are seen together frequently at the same place and same time are most probably socially related. In this article, we are interested in inferring these social connections by analyzing people’s location information; this is useful in a variety of application domains, from sales and marketing to intelligence analysis. In particular, we propose an entropy-based model (EBM) that not only infers social connections but also estimates the strength of social connections by analyzing people’s co-occurrences in space and time. We examine two independent methods: diversity and weighted frequency, through which co-occurrences contribute to the strength of a social connection. In addition, we take the characteristics of each location into consideration in order to compensate for cases where only limited location information is available. We also study the role of location semantics in improving our computation of social strength. We develop a parallel implementation of our algorithm using MapReduce to create a scalable and efficient solution for online applications. We conducted extensive sets of experiments with real-world datasets including both people’s location data and their social connections, where we used the latter as the ground truth to verify the results of applying our approach to the former. We show that our approach is valid across different networks and outperforms the competitors.

References

  1. Bhuvan Bamba, Ling Liu, Peter Pesti, and Ting Wang. 2008. Supporting anonymous location queries in mobile environments with privacygrid. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, 237--246.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Michael Barbaro, Tom Zeller, and Saul Hansell. 2006. A face is exposed for AOL searcher no. 4417749. New York Times 9, 2008 (2006), 8For.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. J. L. Bentley. 1975. Multidimensional binary search trees used for associative searching. Commun. ACM 18, 9 (1975), 509--517.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Igor Bilogrevic, Kévin Huguenin, Murtuza Jadliwala, Florent Lopez, Jean-Pierre Hubaux, Philip Ginzboorg, and Valtteri Niemi. 2013. Inferring social ties in academic networks using short-range wireless communications. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM Workshop on Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society. ACM, 179--188.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Igor Bilogrevic, Murtuza Jadliwala, István Lám, Imad Aad, Philip Ginzboorg, Valtteri Niemi, Laurent Bindschaedler, and Jean-Pierre Hubaux. 2012. Big brother knows your friends: On privacy of social communities in pervasive networks. In Pervasive Computing. Springer, 370--387.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. C. M. Bishop. 2006. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Vol. 4. Springer, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. D. M. Blei, A. Y. Ng, and M. I. Jordan. 2003. Latent Dirichlet allocation. J. Mach. Learning Res. 3 (2003), 993--1022.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Chloë Brown, Neal Lathia, Cecilia Mascolo, Anastasios Noulas, and Vincent Blondel. 2014. Group colocation behavior in technological social networks. PloS One 9, 8 (2014), e105816.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Chloë Brown, Vincenzo Nicosia, Salvatore Scellato, Anastasios Noulas, and Cecilia Mascolo. 2012. The importance of being placefriends: Discovering location-focused online communities. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Workshop on Workshop on Online Social Networks. ACM, 31--36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Chloë Brown, Vincenzo Nicosia, Salvatore Scellato, Anastasios Noulas, and Cecilia Mascolo. 2013a. Social and place-focused communities in location-based online social networks. Eur. Phys. J. B 86, 6 (2013), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Chloë Brown, Anastasios Noulas, Cecilia Mascolo, and Vincent Blondel. 2013b. A place-focused model for social networks in cities. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Social Computing (SocialCom). IEEE, 75--80.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, and W. W. Hartup. 1998. The Company They Keep: Friendships in Childhood and Adolescence. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Xin Cao, Gao Cong, and Christian S. Jensen. 2010. Mining significant semantic locations from GPS data. Proc. VLDB Endowment 3, 1--2 (2010), 1009--1020.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Eunjoon Cho, Seth A. Myers, and Jure Leskovec. 2011. Friendship and mobility: User movement in location-based social networks. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD (KDD’11). New York, NY, 1082--1090. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2020408.2020579Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Chi-Yin Chow and Mohamed F. Mokbel. 2007. Enabling private continuous queries for revealed user locations. In Advances in Spatial and Temporal Databases. Springer, 258--275.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. David J. Crandall, Lars Backstrom, Dan Cosley, Siddharth Suri, Daniel Huttenlocher, and Jon Kleinberg. 2010. Inferring social ties from geographic coincidences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 52 (2010), 22436--22441. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1006155107Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Justin Cranshaw, Eran Toch, Jason Hong, Aniket Kittur, and Norman Sadeh. 2010. Bridging the gap between physical location and online social networks. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (Ubicomp’10). ACM, New York, NY, 119--128. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1864349.1864380Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Miguel Rio de Sangre. 2013. The Geography of Tweets. Retrieved from https://blog.twitter.com/2013/the-geography-of-tweets.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. J. Dean and S. Ghemawat. 2008. MapReduce: Simplified data processing on large clusters. Commun. ACM 51, 1 (2008), 107--113.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Nathan Eagle, Alex (Sandy) Pentland, and David Lazer. 2009. Inferring friendship network structure by using mobile phone data. Proc. NAS 106, 36 (2009), 15274--15278. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900282106Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Eventbrite. 2015. Homepage. https://www.eventbrite.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Manuel Gomez Rodriguez, Jure Leskovec, and Andreas Krause. 2010. Inferring networks of diffusion and influence. In ACM SIGKDD. 1019--1028.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Amit Goyal, Francesco Bonchi, and Laks V. S. Lakshmanan. 2010. Learning influence probabilities in social networks. In ACM WSDM. New York, NY, 241--250.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Amit Goyal, Francesco Bonchi, and Laks V. S. Lakshmanan. 2011. A data-based approach to social influence maximization. VLDB 5, 1 (2011), 73--84.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Marco Gruteser and Dirk Grunwald. 2003. Anonymous usage of location-based services through spatial and temporal cloaking. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services. ACM, 31--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. M. O. Hill. 1973. Diversity and evenness: A unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54 (1973), 427--432.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Cho-Jui Hsieh, Mitul Tiwari, Deepak Agarwal, Xinyi (Lisa) Huang, and Sam Shah. 2013. Organizational overlap on social networks and its applications. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’13). International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland, 571--582. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2488388.2488439Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Lou Jost. 2006. Entropy and diversity. Oikos 113, 2 (2006), 363--375. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14714.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Byoungyoung Lee, Jinoh Oh, Hwanjo Yu, and Jong Kim. 2011. Protecting location privacy using location semantics. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 1289--1297.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Jure Leskovec. 2007-2012. Stanford Large Network Dataset Collection. (2007--2012). http://snap.stanford.edu/data/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Quannan Li, Yu Zheng, Xing Xie, Yukun Chen, Wenyu Liu, and Wei-Ying Ma. 2008. Mining user similarity based on location history. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGSPATIAL (GIS’08). ACM, New York, NY, Article 34, 10 pages. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1463434.1463477Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. D. Liben-Nowell and J. Kleinberg. 2007. The link-prediction problem for social networks. J. Am. Soc. IST 58, 7 (2007), 1019--1031.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Juhong Liu, Ouri Wolfson, and Huabei Yin. 2006. Extracting semantic location from outdoor positioning systems. In MDM. Citeseer, 73.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Hao Ma. 2013. An experimental study on implicit social recommendation. In Proceedings of the 36th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR’13). ACM, New York, NY, 73--82. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2484028.2484059Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. J. P. Mangalindan. 2013. Today in Tech. Retrieved from http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/03/18/today-in-tech-hulu-tk/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Mohamed F. Mokbel, Chi-Yin Chow, and Walid G. Aref. 2006. The new casper: Query processing for location services without compromising privacy. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases. VLDB Endowment, 763--774.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Arvind Narayanan and Vitaly Shmatikov. 2008. Robust de-anonymization of large sparse datasets. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2008 (SP’08). IEEE, 111--125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Jasmine Novak, Prabhakar Raghavan, and Andrew Tomkins. 2004. Anti-aliasing on the web. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, 30--39.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Debra L. Oswald and Eddie M. Clark. 2003. Best friends forever? High school best friendships and the transition to college. Personal Relationships 10, 2 (2003), 187--196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Huy Pham, Ling Hu, and Cyrus Shahabi. 2011. Towards integrating real-world spatiotemporal data with social networks. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSPATIAL (GIS’11). ACM, New York, NY, 453--457. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2093973.2094046Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Huy Pham, Cyrus Shahabi, and Yan Liu. 2013. EBM: An entropy-based model to infer social strength from spatiotemporal data. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data. ACM, 265--276.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Guo-Jun Qi, Charu C. Aggarwal, and Thomas Huang. 2013. Link prediction across networks by biased cross-network sampling. In 2013 IEEE 29th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE’13), 793--804. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICDE.2013.6544875Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. A. Renyi. 1960. On measures of entropy and information. In Berkeley Symposium Mathematics, Statistics, and Probability. 547--561.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Hanan Samet. 1984. The quadtree and related hierarchical data structures. ACM Comput. Surv. 16, 2 (June 1984), 187--260. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/356924.356930Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Daniel V. Schroeder and Harvey Gould. 2000. An introduction to thermal physics. Phys. Today 53, 8 (2000), 44--45. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2405696Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Patricia M. Sias and Daniel J. Cahill. 1998. From coworkers to friends: The development of peer friendships in the workplace. West. J. Commun. (Includes Commun. Rep.) 62, 3 (1998), 273--299.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Socialbakers. 2011. Interesting Facebook Places numbers. Retrieved from http://www.socialbakers.com/blog/167-interesting-facebook-places-numbers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Liang Tang, Haiquan Chen, Haixun Wang, Min-Te Sun, and Wei-Shinn Ku. 2013. LinkProbe: Probabilistic inference on large-scale social networks. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE’13). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 290--301. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICDE.2013.6544833Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Hanna Tuomisto. 2010a. A consistent terminology for quantifying species diversity? Yes, it does exist. Oecologia 164, 4 (2010), 853--860. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442-010-1812-0Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Hanna Tuomisto. 2010b. A diversity of beta diversities: Straightening up a concept. Ecography 33, 1 (2010), 2--22. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05880.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Chris Weidemann. 2013. GeoSocial Footprint. Retrieved from http://geosocialfootprint.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Carol Werner and Pat Parmelee. 1979. Similarity of activity preferences among friends: Those who play together stay together. Social Psychol. Qtly. (1979), 62--66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Mao Ye, Dong Shou, Wang-Chien Lee, Peifeng Yin, and Krzysztof Janowicz. 2011. On the semantic annotation of places in location-based social networks. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 520--528.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Inferring Social Strength from Spatiotemporal Data

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Database Systems
        ACM Transactions on Database Systems  Volume 41, Issue 1
        Invited Paper from ICDT 2015, SIGMOD 2014, EDBT 2014 and Regular Papers
        April 2016
        287 pages
        ISSN:0362-5915
        EISSN:1557-4644
        DOI:10.1145/2897141
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2016 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 18 March 2016
        • Accepted: 1 November 2015
        • Revised: 1 October 2015
        • Received: 1 February 2014
        Published in tods Volume 41, Issue 1

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader