Phil 4.22.16

7:00 – 4:30 VTX

  • Had a thought going to sleep last night that it would be interesting to see the difference between a ‘naive’ ranking based on the number of quotes vs. PageRank. Pretty much as soon as I got up, I pulled down the spreadsheet and got the lists. It’s in the previous post, but I’ll pot them here too:
    • Sorted from most to least quotes
      P61: A Survey on Assessment and Ranking Methodologies for User-Generated Content on the Web.pdf
      P13: The Egyptian Blogosphere.pdf
      P10: Sensing_And_Shaping_Emerging_Conflicts.pdf
      P85: Technology Humanness and Trust-Rethinking Trust in Technology.pdf
      P 5: Saracevic_relevance_75.pdf
      P 1: Social Media and Trust during the Gezi Protests in Turkey.pdf
      P77: The Law of Group Polarization.pdf
      P43: On the Accuracy of Media-based Conflict Event Data.pdf
      System Trust
      P37: Security-control methods for statistical databases – a comparative study.pdf
    • Sorted on Page Rank eigenvector
      P85: Technology Humanness and Trust-Rethinking Trust in Technology.pdf
      System Trust
      Social Trust
      P61: A Survey on Assessment and Ranking Methodologies for User-Generated Content on the Web.pdf
      P84: What is Trust_ A Conceptual Analysis–AMCIS-2000.pdf
      P 1: Social Media and Trust during the Gezi Protests in Turkey.pdf
      Credibility Cues
      P13: The Egyptian Blogosphere.pdf
      P10: Sensing_And_Shaping_Emerging_Conflicts.pdf
      P82: The ‘like me’ framework for recognizing and becoming an intentional agent.pdf
  • To me it’s really interesting how much better the codes are mixed in to the results. I actually thought it could be the other way, since the codes are common across many papers. Also, the concepts of System Trust, Social Trust and Credibility  Cues very much became a central point in my mind as I worked through the papers.
  • A second thought, which is the next step in the research, is to see ho weighting affects relationships. Right now, the the papers and codes are weighted by the number of quotes. What happens when all the weights are normalized (set to 1.0)?. And then there is the setup of the interactivity. With zero optimizations, this took 4.2 seconds to calculate on a modern laptop. Not sliderbar rates, but change a (some?) values and click a ‘run’ button.
  • So, moving forward, the next steps are to create the Swing App that will:
    • read in a spreadsheet (xls and xlsx)
    • Write out spreadsheets (page containing the data information
      • File
      • User
      • Date run
      • Settings used
    • allow for manipulation of row and column values (in this case, papers and codes, but the possibilities are endless)
      • Select the value to manipulate (reset should be an option)
      • Spinner/entry field to set changes (original value in label)
      • ‘Calculate’ button
      • Sorted list(s) of rows and columns. (indicate +/- change in rank)
    • Reset all button
    • Normalize all button
  • I’d like to do something with the connectivity graph. Not sure what yet.
  • And I think I’ll do this in JavaFX rather than Swing this time.
  • Huh. JavaFX Scene Builder is no longer supported by Oracle. Now it’s a Gluon project.
  • Documentation still seems to be at Oracle though
  • Spent most of the day seeing what’s going on with the Crawl. Turns out it was bad formatting on the terms?
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: