Paper detail

ChoiceGAPs: Competitive Diffusion as a Massive Multi-Player Game in Social Networks

We consider the problem of modeling competitive diffusion in real world social networks via the notion of ChoiceGAPs which combine choice logic programs due to Sacca` and Zaniolo and Generalized Annotated Programs due to Kifer and Subrahmanian. We assume that each vertex in a social network is a player in a multi-player game (with a huge number of players) - the choice part of the ChoiceGAPs describe utilities of players for acting in various ways based on utilities of their neighbors in those and other situations. We define multi-player Nash equilibrium for such programs - but because they require some conditions that are hard to satisfy in the real world, we introduce a new model-theoretic concept of strong equilibrium. We show that stable equilibria can capture all Nash equilibria. We prove a host of complexity (intractability) results for checking existence of strong equilibria (as well as related counting complexity results), together with algorithms to find them. We then identify a class of ChoiceGAPs for which stable equilibria can be polynomially computed. We develop algorithms for computing these equilibria under various restrictions. We come up with the important concept of an estimation query which can compute quantities w.r.t. a given strong equilibrium, and approximate ranges of values (answers) across the space of strong equilibria. Even though we show that computing range answers to estimation queries exactly is intractable, we are able to identify classes of estimation queries that can be answered in polynomial time. We report on experiments we conducted with a real-world FaceBook data set surrounding the 2013 Italian election showing that our algorithms have good predictive accuracy with an Area Under a ROC Curve that, on average, is over 0.76.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.