BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Allen Lavoie

Allen Lavoie contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine LearningSocial and Information NetworksComputation and Languagemath.COphysics.soc-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2014arXiv

Home Is Where the Up-Votes Are: Behavior Changes in Response to Feedback in Social Media

Recent research shows that humans are heavily influenced by online social interactions: We are more likely to perform actions which, in the past, have led to positive social feedback. We introduce a quantitative model of behavior changes in response to such feedback, drawing on inverse reinforcement learning and studies of human game playing. The model allows us to make predictions, particularly in the context of social media, about which community a user will select, and to quantify how future selections change based on the feedback a user receives. We show that our model predicts real-world changes in behavior on a dataset gathered from reddit. We also explore how this relatively simple model of individual behavior can lead to complex collective dynamics when there is a population of users, each individual learning in response to feedback and in turn providing feedback to others.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Pushing Your Point of View: Behavioral Measures of Manipulation in Wikipedia

As a major source for information on virtually any topic, Wikipedia serves an important role in public dissemination and consumption of knowledge. As a result, it presents tremendous potential for people to promulgate their own points of view; such efforts may be more subtle than typical vandalism. In this paper, we introduce new behavioral metrics to quantify the level of controversy associated with a particular user: a Controversy Score (C-Score) based on the amount of attention the user focuses on controversial pages, and a Clustered Controversy Score (CC-Score) that also takes into account topical clustering. We show that both these measures are useful for identifying people who try to "push" their points of view, by showing that they are good predictors of which editors get blocked. The metrics can be used to triage potential POV pushers. We apply this idea to a dataset of users who requested promotion to administrator status and easily identify some editors who significantly changed their behavior upon becoming administrators. At the same time, such behavior is not rampant. Those who are promoted to administrator status tend to have more stable behavior than comparable groups of prolific editors. This suggests that the Adminship process works well, and that the Wikipedia community is not overwhelmed by users who become administrators to promote their own points of view.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Algorithmic Detection of Computer Generated Text

Computer generated academic papers have been used to expose a lack of thorough human review at several computer science conferences. We assess the problem of classifying such documents. After identifying and evaluating several quantifiable features of academic papers, we apply methods from machine learning to build a binary classifier. In tests with two hundred papers, the resulting classifier correctly labeled papers either as human written or as computer generated with no false classifications of computer generated papers as human and a 2% false classification rate for human papers as computer generated. We believe generalizations of these features are applicable to similar classification problems. While most current text-based spam detection techniques focus on the keyword-based classification of email messages, a new generation of unsolicited computer-generated advertisements masquerade as legitimate postings in online groups, message boards and social news sites. Our results show that taking the formatting and contextual clues offered by these environments into account may be of central importance when selecting features with which to identify such unwanted postings.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access