Skip to main content

Authors in a Markov matrix Part 2 (3) Experimental results: Which author do people find most inspiring?


In this article, I will explain about our implementation and how the adjacency matrix looks like.

Implementation

We implemented the following programs:

  • Link_Vector_Extractor: Generate the author vector from the data.
  • Graph_Extractor: Generate the adjacency matrix from the data and the author vector.
  • Page_Rank: Compute page rank.
  • Remapper: Re-map the author vector according to the page rank result.

Our experiment is done with the computer CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) DUO CPU P8400, 2 Cores, OS: 64bit Linux 3.2.0.32, Kubuntu 12.04. We used the following software: Python 2.7.3, Beautiful Soup 4.0.2, matlab R2006a, octave 3.2.4.

Adjacency matrix

Figures 2, 3, 4 show the adjacency matrices. In these Figures, blue points represent the connection.
Figure 2: Adjacency matrices. Top to bottom: German authors in de. wikipedia.org, en.wikipedia.org, ja.wikipedia.org.

Figure 3: Adjacency matrices. Top to bottom: English authors in de. wikipedia.org, en.wikipedia.org, ja.wikipedia.org.
Figure 4: Adjacency matrices. Top to bottom: Japanese authors in de. wikipedia.org, en.wikipedia.org, ja.wikipedia.org.
In Figure 2, German author, en.wikipedia.org has a regular pattern.  We haven't check what exactly causes this, however, we think this is the same problem of the template bias (will be discussed later) (Note 1). The German author in en.wikipedia.org has another peculiarity that we can see the higher number of links compare to other Wikipedia data shown in Table 2. We count the number of links is how many links are connected to the author vector entry, not all the links in the page since these are the connection in the adjacency matrix. For example, we didn't count the links to other language pages, self links, author links that were not on the author vector. Therefore, if the page has links to non-author person, we didn't count these links.
Table 2: Matrix size, non zero elements, and the average number of links between authors. Wiki ``en'' means en.wikipedia.org.

We removed rank sink nodes according to the PageRank algorithm [1]. We removed links related rank sink node pages, therefore we also removed so called dangling links (2.7 in [2]), since the links refereeing single sink rank node are the dangling links.  Additionally, we removed pages that has only outgoing links. In the original PageRank paper [2], nodes that have only outgoing links are not mentioned, though this doesn't make sense in the PageRank concept. However, it is easy to imagine the reason why the paper didn't mentioned about them. Since the original paper is for the web, it is hard to determine a node is not linked from any pages. To determine this, all the pages are considered. But, this is practically impossible on the web, therefore it is natural that the original paper didn't consider this outgoing link only nodes. However, our author vector has a limited size and we know all valid pages, therefore, we can remove these nodes. The link normalization value of PageRank calculation depends on whether considering these links or not. This means, it may affect the absolute value of the PageRank. However we are not interested in the absolute value of the PageRank. We are rather interested in the relative value, which author's influence is larger. The PageRank paper also mentioned this normalization has not large effect since they are also interested in the relative influence.

The matrix size is reduced by this operation, the result size is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Adjacency matrices: original size, reduced size, and its rank.

Finally, I will show you who is the most important author in the next article (in a Wikipedia sense).

Note 1: When I wrote this article in my blog, my friend, Joerg M. pointed out this possibility (2012-12-29). Thanks.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why parallelogram area is |ad-bc|?

Here is my question. The area of parallelogram is the difference of these two rectangles (red rectangle - blue rectangle). This is not intuitive for me. If you also think it is not so intuitive, you might interested in my slides. I try to explain this for hight school students. Slides:  A bit intuitive (for me) explanation of area of parallelogram  (to my site, external link) . 
Post a Comment
Read more

Geometric Multiplicity: eignvectors (2)

If eigenvectors of a matrix A are independent, it is a happy property. Because the matrix A can be diagonalized with a matrix S that column vectors are eigenvectors of A . For example, Why this is a happy property of A? Because I can find A's power easily. A^{10} is not a big deal. Because Λ is a diagonal matrix and power of a diagonal matrix is quite simple. A^{10} = SΛ^{10} S^{-1} Then, why if I want to compute power of A ? That is the same reason to find eigenvectors. Eigenvectors are a basis of a matrix. A matrix can be represented by a single scalar. I repeat this again. This is the happy point, a matrix becomes a scalar. What can be simpler than a scalar value. But, this is only possible when the matrix S's columns are independent. Because S^{-1} must be exist. Now I come back to my first question. Is the λ's multiplicity related with the number of eigenvectors? This time I found this has the name. Geometric multiplicity (GM): the number of in...
Post a Comment
Read more

Gauss's quote for positive, negative, and imaginary number

Recently I watched the following great videos about imaginary numbers by Welch Labs. https://youtu.be/T647CGsuOVU?list=PLiaHhY2iBX9g6KIvZ_703G3KJXapKkNaF I like this article about naming of math by Kalid Azad. https://betterexplained.com/articles/learning-tip-idea-name/ Both articles mentioned about Gauss, who suggested to use other names of positive, negative, and imaginary numbers. Gauss wrote these names are wrong and that is one of the reason people didn't get why negative times negative is positive, or, pure positive imaginary times pure positive imaginary is negative real number. I made a few videos about explaining why -1 * -1 = +1, too. Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by pattern https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by climbing a mountain https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 But actually Gauss's insight is much powerful. The original is in the Gauß, Werke, Bd. 2, S. 178 . Hätte man +1, -1, √-1) nicht positiv, negative, imaginäre (oder gar um...
Post a Comment
Read more