
Citation: James Charlesworth, Brendan P. Burns. Extremophilic adaptations and biotechnological applications in diverse environments[J]. AIMS Microbiology, 2016, 2(3): 251-261. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2016.3.251
[1] | Fulian Yin, Hongyu Pang, Lingyao Zhu, Peiqi Liu, Xueying Shao, Qingyu Liu, Jianhong Wu . The role of proactive behavior on COVID-19 infordemic in the Chinese Sina-Microblog: a modeling study. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 7389-7401. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021365 |
[2] | Fulian Yin, Xinyi Tang, Tongyu Liang, Yanjing Huang, Jianhong Wu . External intervention model with direct and indirect propagation behaviors on social media platforms. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(11): 11380-11398. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022530 |
[3] | Fulian Yin, Jiahui Lv, Xiaojian Zhang, Xinyu Xia, Jianhong Wu . COVID-19 information propagation dynamics in the Chinese Sina-microblog. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(3): 2676-2692. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020146 |
[4] | Xiaonan Chen, Suxia Zhang . An SEIR model for information propagation with a hot search effect in complex networks. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(1): 1251-1273. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023057 |
[5] | Tinghuai Ma, Hongmei Wang, Yuwei Zhao, Yuan Tian, Najla Al-Nabhan . Topic-based automatic summarization algorithm for Chinese short text. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(4): 3582-3600. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020202 |
[6] | Fulian Yin, Jinxia Wang, Xinyi Jiang, Yanjing Huang, Qianyi Yang, Jianhong Wu . Modeling and analyzing an opinion network dynamics considering the environmental factor. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(9): 16866-16885. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023752 |
[7] | Akinori Awazu . Input-dependent wave propagations in asymmetric cellular automata: Possible behaviors of feed-forward loop in biological reaction network. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2008, 5(3): 419-427. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2008.5.419 |
[8] | Lei Yuan, Jianhua Song, Yazhuo Fan . FM-Unet: Biomedical image segmentation based on feedback mechanism Unet. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7): 12039-12055. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023535 |
[9] | Ruirui Han, Zhichang Zhang, Hao Wei, Deyue Yin . Chinese medical event detection based on event frequency distribution ratio and document consistency. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(6): 11063-11080. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023489 |
[10] | Kelu Li, Junyuan Yang, Xuezhi Li . Effects of co-infection on vaccination behavior and disease propagation. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(10): 10022-10036. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022468 |
The Chinese Sina-Microblog is reported to have 446 million active users per month (32% of the Chinese population) at the end of 2018 and is particularly popular among the young generations. Take the event (Weibo) "304 car theft case" as an example, around 185 thousand of forwarding users were generated into 36 hours since it was posted [1]. This important platform presents some unique characteristics different from other microblogs for public opinion diffusion [2,3] that a systematic approach towards understanding the diffusion patterns and nearcasting the information propagation is called for.
The information propagation of a microblog is created through the action of "follow" connecting as an interaction network, where a following user is called "follower" and a followed user is called "followee" [4,5]. There are a large amount of literature and there seem to be three typical and important information diffusion models developed for microblogs [6] according to the spreading process, influence ability [7,8] and forwarding factors [9,10]. The model we are exploring is based on the propagation process as we focus on the dynamic changes of the status of users during the spreading process.
Our approach follows the classical rumor model that evolved from the epidemic models, in which the population is stratified into three mutually exclusive and exhaustive classes: heard rumor (ignorants), actively spreading rumor (spreaders) and no longer spreading rumor (stiflers). The propagation of information (rumor) occurs through the transitions of infections from ignorants to spreaders, and removals from spreader to stiflers [11]. This is very much similar to epidemic models for infectious disease spreading in the population. Extensions from this classic rumor model to information spreading in microblogs include propagation transition models [12,13,14,15,16] and population classification models [17,18,19,20,21]. In particular, taking into account of different behaviors of differential users in different platforms, Huang et al. [12] extended the rumor spreading model to characterize browsing behaviors of users and examine differentiating rumor refuting effects. This model involves a parameter similar to the birth rate in a standard epidemic model to describe the entry of new susceptibles. Liu et al. [13] proposed a modified rumor spreading model (SIRe), where two contact parameters are used to describe the stifler's broadcasting effect and social intimacy degree. Su et al. [14] developed a Microblog-Susceptible-Infected-Removed (Mb-SIR) model for information propagation by explicitly considering the incomplete reading behaviors of users using the probability that a newly posted or retweeted message will be read by its followers. These models also utilized real data from the Chinese Sina-Microblog in their numerical simulations.
Our framework follows the work of Borge-Holthoefer et al. [15] that considered the situation where spreaders are not always active and an ignorant is not interested in spreading the rumor. Their numerical simulations were based on data from Twitter. A similar model for an information dissemination network was proposed in [16], where different transition probabilities from the spreader stage to stifler stage and from the ignorant stage to stifler stage were used. This set a theoretical foundation to compare microblog information dissemination and epidemic disease spreading.There have been other efforts to incorporate further states during the propagation process, in addition to the states of ignorant, spreader and stifler. In particular, reflecting some information features and diffusion characteristics of Weibos in the Chinese Sina-Microblog, Li et al. [17] incorporated the number of fans of infectious and validated the modified SIR model using actual event data. Liu et al. [18] considered a dynamic model to characterize the super-spreading phenomenon in tweet information propagation. An ignorant spreaders, super-spreaders, stiflers model (ISJR model) was proposed in [19] that considered the role of super-spreaders to show how super-spreaders can accelerate the information dissemination and amplify information influence in microblogging networks. Other models have also been proposed to incorporate the recovery state of users in different platforms including the Chinese Microblogs, Japanese Mixi, and Facebook [20,21].
Here we consider the capacity of using a simple compartmental model for information propagation of Microblog for nearcasting the trend of information propagation in the Chinese Microblogs. Nearcasting is an important issue for assessing public opinions, that aims to project the forwarding trend at the earliest possible stage of a Weibo outbreak so interventions for the information propagation and/or rapid response to the public opinions can be designed and implemented effectively. Our ultimate goal is to develop nearcasting technologies for a group of Weibos (similar to "Tweet" in Twitter) in the ecosystem of Chinese Microblogs. To achieve this goal, we need to develop computable summative indices to characterize each Weibo, and see how these indices can be effectively calculated or at least estimated from the public available information at the early stage of information propagation of the Weibo. Here, we formulate the basic compartmental model (SFI) and introduce the Weibo propagation indices in the Chinese Sina-Microblog (Section 2), and then contrast two methods to use this SFI-model for nearcasting.
We consider a population of Chinese Sina-Microblog users, stratified in terms of three distinct states: the susceptible state (S), in which users are unaware of but susceptible to the Weibo; the forwarding state (F), in which users have been forwarding the Weibo actively to influence other users; and the immuned state (I), in which users have already forwarded the Weibo, but are no longer forwarding the Weibo and even if receiving it again.
Assuming the populations susceptible to the Weibo is sufficiently large and denoting the total numbers of users in the susceptible, forwarding and immune state at time t≥0 by S(t), F(t) and I(t), respectively, we obtain the following susceptible-forwarding-immune model:
S′(t)=−βS(t)F(t), | (2.1) |
F′(t)=pβS(t)F(t)−αF(t), | (2.2) |
I′(t)=(1−p)βS(t)F(t)+αF(t), | (2.3) |
where ′=d/dt is the derivative with respect to t. The model is illustrated in Figure 1.
In the model, β is the average number of exposures to the Weibo of a susceptible user, p is the probability that the exposed user will forward the Weibo and α is the rate at which a user in the F state becomes inactive to forwarding. The mass action term can also be interpreted as follows: an active forwarding user will contact an average number of βN users per unit time, among which pβN will choose to forward the Weibo and (1−p)βN will not. Since the probability of a contacted user to be a susceptible user is S(t)/N, the number of exposed users who leave the state S are βS(t)F(t) among which new forwarding and immuned users are pβN(S(t)/N)F(t)=pβS(t)F(t) and (1−p)βS(t)F(t), respectively. As usual, 1/α is the average duration a F-user remains active in forwarding.
An important distinction between a standard epidemic-SIR model and the Weibo-SFI model is the direct immunity of a susceptible user gained through exposure to the Weibo. The parameter 1−p reflect the suitability of the Weibo for a susceptible user to trick the activity of forwarding. This SFI model was used in [15,16] as a basic building block of a more complicated framework. We adopt this for the Weibo information spread dynamics model in the hope this can be further expanded to discuss the dynamics of an ecosystem consisting of multiple Weibos sharing a same set of key words. The novelty of our approach here is to develop some analytic indices which will be used in our subsequent studies to consider Weibo spreading dynamics in a complex Weibo ecosystem, and explore the feasibility of using openly available Weibo data from the Chinese Sina-Microlog to estimate these indices for the purpose of nearcasting the propagation trend.
The official Chinese Sina-Microblog only provides limited information of the propagation, an important piece of information we can obtain from the Chinese Sina-Microblog directly is the number of cumulative forwarding users given by
E(t)=∫t0pβS(t)F(t)dt. | (2.4) |
Observe that this is NOT a new compartment from the coupled system (2.1). Instead, from Eq (2.1), we can obtain
E′(t)=pβS(t)F(t). | (2.5) |
It is easy to show that S(t), F(t), I(t) and hence E(t) all remain nonnegative. We consider the case when the Weibo is posted by a single user at the beginning, leading the initial condition: E0=F0=1, I0=0, S0=N−F0=N−1.
From Eqs (2.1) and (2.5) it follows that S(t) is decreasing since S′(t)=−βS(t)F(t)<0, and that the function E(t) is increasing since E′(t)=pβS(t)F(t)>0. Therefore, S(t) decreases to a limit S∞:=limt→∞S(t)>0, E(t) increases to a limit E∞:=limt→∞E(t)<N, F(t) tends to 0 (F∞=0), and I∞=N−S∞. These limits are shown to be relevant to the so-called final size of the Weibo spreading.
Weibo reproduction ratio ℜo: The initial growth of the F-population is given by r=pβS0−α, and the propagation of the Weibo will never take off if F′(t)>0. Since F′(t)≤(pβS0−α)F(t) due to the decreasing property of S(t)(S(t)<S0). We then define
ℜo:=pβS0α | (2.6) |
as the Weibo reproduction ratio. Then ℜo<1 implies a rapid decline of F-user which results in information propagation never taking off. However, when ℜo>1 the F-population used grow exponentially initially.
Index ℜo denotes the number of F-users generated by one active forwarding user during an active period. A typical curve for F-population with a Weibo with ℜo>1 has the bell shape as shown in Figure 2. Maximal Weibo forwarding users Fmax: The maximum of the F-curve is achieved when F′(t)=0. At this point, we have S(t)=α/pβ. We also use Eqs (2.1) and (2.2) to get
F′(t)=(αβS(t)−p)S′(t). | (2.7) |
Integrating then yields
F(t)=F0+p[S0−S(t)]+αβlogS(t)S0. | (2.8) |
If we substitute F0=1, we get (notify Fmax=F(t) for t when S(t)=α/pβ) that
Fmax=1+pS0−αβ(1−logαpβS0)=1+pS0−pS0ℜo(1−log1ℜo). | (2.9) |
Maximum Weibo cumulative forwarding users Es: The maximum Weibo cumulative forwarding users Es, which represents the number of users that encountered the Weibo, is also a factor we are interested in. To establish an analytic formula, we integrate from 0 to +∞ on both sides of Eq (2.1) to get
∫+∞01S(t)dS(t)=−β∫+∞0F(t)dt. | (2.10) |
Adding Eqs (2.1) and (2.2) and integration yields also
p∫+∞0dS(t)+∫+∞0dF(t)=−α∫+∞0F(t)dt. | (2.11) |
From Eqs (2.11) and (2.12), we get
log(S∞S0)=βα[p(S∞−S0)+(F∞−F0)]. | (2.12) |
In order to analyze the relation between E and S, we integrate from Eqs (2.1) and (2.5) to obtain
S∞=S0−E∞−E0p. | (2.13) |
Similarly, E0=F0=1, F∞=0 and ℜo=pβS0/α, from Eqs (2.12) and (2.13) we get (notify Es:=E∞) that
log(1−1pS0(Es−1))=−βαEs=−ℜopS0Es | (2.14) |
and then
Es=1+pS0(1−e−βαEs)=1+pS0(1−e−ℜopS0Es). | (2.15) |
We observe from Eqs (2.9) and (2.15) that, with a fixed ℜo, the final outcome of the Weibo spread is determined by parameter S0. Note that, differently from an epidemic study, the initial susceptible Weibo users are usually unknown.
Weibo public opinion times and velocities: To understand the global performance of the Weibo ecosystem, we need to know the take-off and extinctive time of a particular Weibo, denoted by tb and te, respectively. The definitions depend on the threshold F∗ which is set in advance such that F(tb)=F∗=F(te). In the experiment we design, we let F∗=0.1×Fmax. The difference, te−tb, is the duration during which the Weibo remains active in the ecosystem. We denote this by ti:=te−tb. Relevant to the timings and the spread duration, we can define the (initial) outbreak velocity Vo, the propagation decline velocity Vd, and the average spreading velocity Va as follows:
Vo=Fmax−F∗tmax−tb, | (2.16) |
Vd=Fmax−F∗te−tmax, | (2.17) |
Va=Fmax−F∗te−tb, | (2.18) |
where tmax is given when F(t)=Fmax. Note that tb, te, tmax, Vo, Vd and Va can be calculated when model parameters are estimated although we do not have the closed form of these quantities. A schematic picture is given in Figure 2.
The number of cumulative forwarding users can be collected through the Weibo' Application Programming Interface (API). Table 1 lists such a data set, studied in paper [22], for an actual event lasted 16 days.
t(day) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
number | 10 | 198 | 737 | 2674 | 9644 | 33943 | 110751 | 550102 |
t(day) | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
number | 739491 | 835032 | 880337 | 913164 | 919055 | 924084 | 925093 | 925664 |
The LS method [23] can be used to estimate the parameters of the SFI model (2.1), (2.2), (2.3) and (2.5). The parameter vector is set as Θ=(β,α,p,S0), and the corresponding numerical result for E(t) is denoted by fE(t,Θ). The LS error function
LS=∑Tk=0|fE(tk,Θ)−IDk|2 | (2.19) |
can be used, where ID denotes the real number of cumulative forwarding users given in Table 1, tk=k is the sampling time, k=1,2,...,16.
We use the standard package (fmincon) of MATLAB to solve a nonlinear LS problem, with parameter initial values and ranges given as follows: β∈[2×10−6,8×10−6], p∈[0.1,0.5], α∈[0.5,1.5], S0∈[7×106,2×107], Θ0=(4.0×10−6,0.3,1.0,1.0×107).
Figure 3 reports our data fitting and simulation results. Figure 3a shows the fitting result between the numerically calculated and the actual numbers of cumulative forwarding users. From the data fitting, we can estimate the model parameters and then inform other information not available from the API. Namely, we can obtain the temporal variations of the numbers of susceptible, forwarding, immunized and cumulative forwarding users, S(t), F(t), I(t) and E(t), after obtaining the model parameters.
ℜo(actual:2.5460) | Fmax(actual:2.4724×105) | Es(actual:0.9243×106) | ||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 2.8762 | – | 3.3083 | – | 1.0824 |
Day 4 | – | 2.6504 | – | 2.7307 | – | 0.9751 |
Day 5 | – | 2.5428 | – | 2.4641 | – | 0.9228 |
Day 6 | – | 2.4803 | – | 2.3126 | – | 0.8920 |
Day 7 | 3.5855 | 2.4412 | 1.4758 | 2.2194 | 0.3920 | 0.8726 |
Day 8 | 4.2506 | 2.5546 | 4.5234 | 2.4942 | 1.0504 | 0.9286 |
Day 9 | 2.7779 | 2.5531 | 2.8837 | 2.4930 | 0.9768 | 0.9278 |
Day 10 | 2.5132 | 2.5504 | 2.4809 | 2.4866 | 0.9411 | 0.9265 |
Day 11 | 2.6986 | 2.5489 | 2.6283 | 2.4759 | 0.9189 | 0.9258 |
Day 12 | 2.6363 | 2.5490 | 2.5757 | 2.4798 | 0.9248 | 0.9258 |
Day 13 | 2.5974 | 2.5492 | 2.5285 | 2.4789 | 0.9245 | 0.9259 |
Day 14 | 2.4557 | 2.5496 | 2.3632 | 2.4796 | 0.9233 | 0.9261 |
Day 15 | 2.4561 | 2.5496 | 2.3738 | 2.4788 | 0.9272 | 0.9261 |
tb(actual:5.92day) | te(actual:12.57day) | ti(actual:6.65day) | tmax(actual:8.49day) | |||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 5.20 | – | 11.05 | – | 5.85 | – | 7.35 |
Day 4 | – | 5.67 | – | 12.03 | – | 5.85 | – | 8.08 |
Day 5 | – | 5.93 | – | 12.59 | – | 6.66 | – | 8.49 |
Day 6 | – | 6.09 | – | 12.95 | – | 6.86 | – | 8.76 |
Day 7 | 5.71 | 6.20 | 13.93 | 13.19 | 8.22 | 6.99 | 8.47 | 8.94 |
Day 8 | 6.20 | 5.90 | 14.94 | 12.52 | 9.74 | 6.62 | 8.91 | 8.46 |
Day 9 | 6.02 | 5.90 | 12.98 | 12.53 | 6.96 | 6.63 | 8.61 | 8.46 |
Day 10 | 5.93 | 5.91 | 12.56 | 12.55 | 6.63 | 6.64 | 8.50 | 8.47 |
Day 11 | 5.92 | 5.91 | 12.73 | 12.56 | 6.81 | 6.65 | 8.48 | 8.47 |
Day 12 | 5.94 | 5.91 | 12.70 | 12.56 | 6.76 | 6.65 | 8.53 | 8.47 |
Day 13 | 5.91 | 5.91 | 12.61 | 12.56 | 6.70 | 6.65 | 8.48 | 8.47 |
Day 14 | 5.90 | 5.91 | 12.44 | 12.56 | 6.54 | 6.65 | 8.46 | 8.47 |
Day 15 | 5.90 | 5.91 | 12.43 | 12.56 | 6.53 | 6.65 | 8.46 | 8.47 |
Vo(actual:0.8658×105/day) | Vd(actual:5.4538×104/day) | Va(actual:3.3461×104/day) | ||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 1.3863 | – | 8.0554 | – | 5.0948 |
Day 4 | – | 1.0199 | – | 6.2227 | – | 3.8647 |
Day 5 | – | 0.8663 | – | 5.4091 | – | 3.3299 |
Day 6 | – | 0.7800 | – | 4.9701 | – | 3.0357 |
Day 7 | 0.4813 | 0.7293 | 2.4331 | 4.7019 | 1.6161 | 2.8588 |
Day 8 | 1.5023 | 0.8773 | 6.7514 | 5.5317 | 4.6580 | 3.3926 |
Day 9 | 1.0021 | 0.8769 | 5.9390 | 5.5159 | 3.7290 | 3.3861 |
Day 10 | 0.8688 | 0.8745 | 5.4995 | 5.4869 | 3.3677 | 3.3715 |
Day 11 | 0.9241 | 0.8706 | 5.5661 | 5.4494 | 3.4737 | 3.3516 |
Day 12 | 0.8952 | 0.8721 | 5.5603 | 5.4586 | 3.4299 | 3.3573 |
Day 13 | 0.8855 | 0.8718 | 5.5105 | 5.4568 | 3.3967 | 3.3561 |
Day 14 | 0.8312 | 0.8720 | 5.3464 | 5.4582 | 3.2536 | 3.3570 |
Day 15 | 0.8349 | 0.8717 | 5.3839 | 5.4562 | 3.2732 | 3.3558 |
Note that for the Weibo data listed in Table 1, the estimated basic reproductive ratio ℜo=2.5460, and since it is much greater than one, we should expect a rapid information spread at the beginning of the propagation. Figure 3a does confirm this expectation. We should also expect, from surveillance data of infectious disease outbreak such as influenza, a large number of F-users and a large number of E-users for the Weibo. The numerical simulations reported in Figure 3b, however, shows otherwise: despite a large number of susceptibles (S0=1.0221×107), the cumulative E-users during the entire propagation is only Es=9.2430×105 and maximum F-users at the propagation peak is only Fmax=2.4724×105. A reason is that p is only 0.1006 and hence a large number of individuals exposed to the Weibo became immunied immediately upon exposure.
The numerical illustration in the last section indicates a good data fitting results using the numbers of cumulative forwarding users during the entire outbreak period. These numbers can be collected from the API, and therefore a Weibo can now be characterized by the SFI-model parameters (β,α,p,S0), using the information from API retroactively.
An important question in Weibo information management is how many units (days) of data about the cumulative forwarding users we need to be able to estimate the model parameter and thus make the prediction for the near future about the propagation trend and calculate key Weibo indices. Figure 4 reports our numerical experiments in which parameters (β,α,p,S0) are estimated from the past days, and then the cumulative F-users are predicted and compared with the actual data from API data.
Comparing with the estimated parameters β=2.5651×10−6, α=1.0365, p=0.1006, and S0=1.0221×107 from the entire outbreak duration, we observe that the estimated parameter and the resulted SFI-model prediction does not fit the actual data until 7 days have pasted, when the peaking time is 8.49 days.
Therefore, the use of an SFI-model for nearcasting is not promising if we need to use the historical data to estimate all the model parameters altogether. On the other hand, in the Chinese Sina-Microblog, parameter β is determined by the compactness of the network structure and parameter α is usually user-specific rather than Weibo-specific. Thus, it is feasible to estimate parameters β and α before the outbreak of an event (for example from other events). Figure 5 gives the numerical results with fixed β and α that are given a-priori.
This experiment indicates the remaining parameters (p,S0) can be estimated from the data in the first 3-days, much ahead of the outbreak peak time. Therefore, the nearcasting capacity of an SFI-model can be significantly enhanced should the network-specific parameter β and user-specific α be estimated in advance.
The numerical experiments with all parameter estimated (Method 1) and some parameters a-priori estimated (Method 2) clearly show that Method 2 has a much better performance in nearcasting with limited historical data well before the peaking time of the Weibo information outbreak.
Tables 2, 3, 4 give the comparison of indices ℜo, Fmax, Es, indices tb, ts, ti, tmax, and indices Vo, Ve, Va, separately. For Method 1, Tables 2, 3, 4 show that at the beginning of the Weibo propagation, our predictions have low accuracy when using the historical data until Day 7. Using the historical data until after the propagation peak (Day 8), the predicted maximum F-users (Fmax), cumulative F-users (Es), reproduction ratio (ℜo) and the outbreak velocity (Vo) are larger than the actual values, indicating over-estimation of the propagation potential. However, as one gains more and more historical data, the prediction converges to the actual values. For the prediction of key times during the Weibo information outbreak, Method 1 can produce predictions of key instants, after Day 7, such as take-off, extinction, duration and propagation peak time within 1-day error. The predicted maximal forwarding users (Fmax), the outbreak velocity (Vo), the propagation decline velocity (Ve) and the average spreading velocity (Va) are all consistent with corresponding actual instants. So, the time after which a good nearcasting prediction is possible is Day 7, and the prediction quality is very high if historical data until Day 9 is used.
Method 2 is more effective in nearcasting both in terms of estimating the peaking time at the 3-day, but also estimating all relevant indices. Therefore, it is advised that one should perform the nearcasting by estimating parameters β and α before the outbreak of the event. This proposed a-priori estimation method for nearcasting emphasizes the importance of understanding the propagation of other previously happened Weibos propagation events in advance, in order to better monitor and respond to public opinion dynamics at a real time.
This paper concerned with nearcasting for forwarding behaviors in the Chinese Sina-Microblog based on the use of a simple compartmental SFI model for a Weibo to be forwarded by users exposed to the Weibo. A significant difference of Weibo information propagation from the pathogen of an infectious disease is that an exposed user may gain immunity to the Weibo so the user becomes completely uninterested in forwarding the Weibo.
The relative simplicity of the model permitted the construction of various indices and their calculations/estimations: the Weibo reproduction ratio, the maximal forwarding users, the maximum cumulative forwarding users, and critical propagation peak time, taking off and extinction times, and propagation velocities during different phases of the information outbreak. An important issue, to use this simple model to predict these critical indices and thus contribute to nearcasting propagation trend based on historical Application Programming Interface (API) data, was addressed through some numerical experiments based on a real Weibo event data. We considered two cases, where we can accurately estimate all model parameters with the historical data passing the peaking time, or we can rapidly and accurately estimate two critical parameters relevant to the Weibo when two other model parameters relevant to the network characteristic and forwarding users' waning interest rate are estimated a-priori. This second approach clearly shows the nearcasting capacity of a simple compartmental SFI-model as long as we have some information about the network characteristics and the anticipated public interest in a class of Weibo events.
The simple model provides two important pieces of information about the propagation characteristics of a particular Weibo: the intrinsic growth rate (the basic Weibo reproduction ratio), and the maximal capacity of the network for the particular Weibo event (the maximal number of cumulative forwarding users). As anticipated from long time intensive modeling study of biological ecosystems, the intrinsic growth rate and the maximal capacity gives the logistic growth dynamics [24] of a single Weibo propagation dynamics. A full understanding of this propagation dynamics of a single Weibo event is the first critical step towards examining the propagation dynamics of a group of interactive Weibo events in a complex network.
There are many different model frameworks, as briefly reviewed in the introduction. We have listed existing studies which are directly relevant to our mechanistic approach towards developing a simple compartmental model for characterizing the Weibo information spread in the Sina-Microblog. We refere to [25,26,27] and references therein for further studies at the intersection of mathematics, epidemics, information diffusion and control. Interestingly, the work [25] that introduces a class of infants with maternal antibodies giving passive temporary immunity for the considered infectious disease may find an application for our modeling Weibo spread within the Sina-Microblog as some immediate followers of opinion leaders may inherit a certain immunity for a Weibo. Obviously, the Sina-Microblog possesses all kinds of features of complex networks [26], the sub-network structure and the network topology require much further investigations that our simple mechanistic model can serve as a building block towards a more complicated network framework. A primary goal of nearcasting the propagation trend is to inform optimal design of interventions, so the methodologies designed for the control of infection dynamics [27] may also be adopted in our simple model and its variations.
We mention also that a variant of the epidemiological SIR model was used in [28] to accurately describe the diffusion of online content over the online social network Digg.com. The work examined also qualitative properties of our viral information propagation model, demonstrate the model's applications to nearcasting social media spread in online social networks. Alternatively, a linear diffusive model was proposed and considered in Feng et al. [29,30] using a temporal-spatial partial differential equation model to explain these rates of spread in the DOSN. The PDE and network analogue of the SFI model should be developed to reflect the spatial spread and network heterogeneity.
The work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant numbers: 61801441), the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Canada Research Chair Program (JWu), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
[1] |
Pettit RK (2011) Culturability and Secondary Metabolite Diversity of Extreme Microbes: Expanding Contribution of Deep Sea and Deep-Sea Vent Microbes to Natural Product Discovery. Mar Biotechnol 13: 1–11. doi: 10.1007/s10126-010-9294-y
![]() |
[2] | Tindall BJ, Ross HNM, Grant WD (1984) Natronobacterium gen. nov. and Natronococcus gen. nov., Two New Genera of Haloalkaliphilic Archaebacteria. Syst Appl Microbiol 5: 41–57. |
[3] |
Hedlund BP, Dodsworth JA, Murugapiran SK, et al. (2014) Impact of single-cell genomics and metagenomics on the emerging view of extremophile “microbial dark matter.” Extremophiles 18: 865–875. doi: 10.1007/s00792-014-0664-7
![]() |
[4] |
Santos F, Moreno-Paz M, Meseguer I, et al. (2011) Metatranscriptomic analysis of extremely halophilic viral communities. ISME J 5: 1621–1633. doi: 10.1038/ismej.2011.34
![]() |
[5] |
Terpe K (2013) Overview of thermostable DNA polymerases for classical PCR applications: From molecular and biochemical fundamentals to commercial systems. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 97: 10243–10254. doi: 10.1007/s00253-013-5290-2
![]() |
[6] |
Ito S, Kobayashi T, Ara K, et al. (1998) Alkaline detergent enzymes from alkaliphiles: Enzymatic properties, genetics, and structures. Extremophiles 2: 185–190. doi: 10.1007/s007920050059
![]() |
[7] |
Zhuang X, Han Z, Bai Z, et al. (2010) Progress in decontamination by halophilic microorganisms in saline wastewater and soil. Environ Pollut 158: 1119–26. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2010.01.007
![]() |
[8] |
Rojas JL, Martín J, Tormo JR, et al. (2009) Bacterial diversity from benthic mats of Antarctic lakes as a source of new bioactive metabolites. Mar Genomics 2: 33–41. doi: 10.1016/j.margen.2009.03.005
![]() |
[9] | Oren A, Gurevich P, Gemmell RT, Teske A (1995) Halobaculum gomorrense gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel extremely halophilic archaeon from the Dead Sea. Int J Syst Bacteriol 45: 747–54. |
[10] |
Norton CF, Grant WD (1988) Survival of Halobacteria Within Fluid Inclusions in Salt Crystals. Microbiology 134: 1365–1373. doi: 10.1099/00221287-134-5-1365
![]() |
[11] |
Chang HW, Kim KH, Nam Y Do, et al. (2008) Analysis of yeast and archaeal population dynamics in kimchi using denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis. Int J Food Microbiol 126: 159–166. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2008.05.013
![]() |
[12] | Birbir M, Eryilmaz S, Ogan A (2004) Prevention of halophilic microbial damage on brine cured hides by extremely halophilic halocin producer strains. J Soc Leather Technol Chem 88: 99–104. |
[13] |
Orlita A (2004) Microbial biodeterioration of leather and its control: A review. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 53: 157–163. doi: 10.1016/S0964-8305(03)00089-1
![]() |
[14] |
Fröls S (2013) Archaeal biofilms: widespread and complex. Biochem Soc Trans 41: 393–8. doi: 10.1042/BST20120304
![]() |
[15] |
Roberts MF (2005) Organic compatible solutes of halotolerant and halophilic microorganisms. Saline Systems 1: 5. doi: 10.1186/1746-1448-1-5
![]() |
[16] |
Madern D, Ebel C, Zaccai G (2000) Halophilic adaptation of enzymes. Extremophiles 4: 91–98. doi: 10.1007/s007920050142
![]() |
[17] | Goh F, Jeon YJ, Barrow K, et al. (2011) Osmoadaptive strategies of the archaeon Halococcus hamelinensis isolated from a hypersaline stromatolite environment. Astrobiology 11: 529–36. |
[18] |
Youssef NH, Savage-Ashlock KN, McCully AL, et al. (2014) Trehalose/2-sulfotrehalose biosynthesis and glycine-betaine uptake are widely spread mechanisms for osmoadaptation in the Halobacteriales. ISME J 8: 636–49. doi: 10.1038/ismej.2013.165
![]() |
[19] |
Kokoeva M V, Storch K-F, Klein C, Oesterhelt D (2002) A novel mode of sensory transduction in archaea: binding protein-mediated chemotaxis towards osmoprotectants and amino acids. EMBO J 21: 2312–22. doi: 10.1093/emboj/21.10.2312
![]() |
[20] |
Strahl H, Greie JC (2008) The extremely halophilic archaeon Halobacterium salinarum R1 responds to potassium limitation by expression of the K+-transporting KdpFABC P-type ATPase and by a decrease in intracellular K+. Extremophiles 12: 741–752. doi: 10.1007/s00792-008-0177-3
![]() |
[21] |
Margesin R, Schinner F (2001) Potential of halotolerant and halophilic microorganisms for biotechnology. Extremophiles 5: 73–83. doi: 10.1007/s007920100184
![]() |
[22] |
Oren A (2002) Diversity of halophilic microorganisms: environments, phylogeny, physiology, and applications. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 28: 56–63. doi: 10.1038/sj/jim/7000176
![]() |
[23] |
Smiddy M, Sleator RD, Patterson MF, et al. (2004) Role for Compatible Solutes Glycine Betaine and L -Carnitine in Listerial Barotolerance. Appl Environ Microbiol 70: 7555–7557. doi: 10.1128/AEM.70.12.7555-7557.2004
![]() |
[24] |
Woolard CR, Irvine RL (1994) Biological treatment of hypersaline wastewater by a biofilm of halophilic bacteria. Water Environ Res 66: 230–235. doi: 10.2175/WER.66.3.8
![]() |
[25] |
Wang YF, Wang XL, Li H, et al. (2014) Treatment of high salinity phenol-laden wastewater using a sequencing batch reactor containing halophilic bacterial community. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 93: 138–144. doi: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2014.04.010
![]() |
[26] |
Al-Mailem DM, Sorkhoh NA, Al-Awadhi H, et al. (2010) Biodegradation of crude oil and pure hydrocarbons by extreme halophilic archaea from hypersaline coasts of the Arabian Gulf. Extremophiles 14: 321–328. doi: 10.1007/s00792-010-0312-9
![]() |
[27] | Poli A, Di Donato P, Abbamondi GR, Nicolaus B (2011) Synthesis, production, and biotechnological applications of exopolysaccharides and polyhydroxyalkanoates by archaea. Archaea 2011: 1–13. |
[28] |
Nicolaus B, Kambourova M, Oner ET (2010) Exopolysaccharides from extremophiles: from fundamentals to biotechnology. Environ Technol 31: 1145–1158. doi: 10.1080/09593330903552094
![]() |
[29] | Popescu G, Dumitru L (2009) Biosorption of some heavy metals from media with high salt concentrations by halophilic archaea. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 791–795. |
[30] | Amoozegar MA, Ghazanfari N, Didari M (2012) Lead and Cadmium Bioremoval by Halomonas sp., an Exopolysaccharide-Producing Halophilic Bacterium. Prog Biol Sci Vol 2: 1–11. |
[31] | Charlesworth JC, Burns BP (2015) Untapped Resources: Biotechnological Potential of Peptides and Secondary Metabolites in Archaea. Archaea. doi: 10.1155/2015/282035. |
[32] | Torreblanca M, Meseguer I, Ventosa A (1994) Production of halocin is a practically universal feature of archaeal halophilic rods. Lett Appl Microbiol 201–205. |
[33] |
O’Connor E, Shand R (2002) Halocins and sulfolobicins: the emerging story of archaeal protein and peptide antibiotics. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 28: 23–31. doi: 10.1038/sj/jim/7000190
![]() |
[34] | Deisseroth K (2011) Optogenetics. Nat Methods 8: 26–29. |
[35] |
Gradinaru V, Thompson KR, Deisseroth K (2008) eNpHR: A Natronomonas halorhodopsin enhanced for optogenetic applications. Brain Cell Biol 36: 129–139. doi: 10.1007/s11068-008-9027-6
![]() |
[36] |
Saiki RK, Gelfand DH, Stoffel S, et al. (1988) Primer-directed enzymatic amplification of DNA with a thermostable DNA polymerase. Science 239: 487–491. doi: 10.1126/science.2448875
![]() |
[37] |
Elleuche S, Schäfers C, Blank S, et al. (2015) Exploration of extremophiles for high temperature biotechnological processes. Curr Opin Microbiol 25: 113–119. doi: 10.1016/j.mib.2015.05.011
![]() |
[38] | Dobretsov S, Abed RMM, Maskari SMS, et al. (2010) Cyanobacterial mats from hot springs produce antimicrobial compounds and quorum-sensing inhibitors under natural conditions. J Appl Phycol 23: 983–993. |
[39] |
Guo JP, Zhu CY, Zhang CP, et al. (2012) Thermolides, potent nematocidal PKS-NRPS hybrid metabolites from thermophilic fungus talaromyces thermophilus. J Am Chem Soc 134: 20306–20309. doi: 10.1021/ja3104044
![]() |
[40] |
Liu L, Salam N, Jiao J-Y, et al. (2016) Diversity of Culturable Thermophilic Actinobacteria in Hot Springs in Tengchong, China and Studies of their Biosynthetic Gene Profiles. Microb Ecol 72: 150-62. doi: 10.1007/s00248-016-0756-2
![]() |
[41] |
Gerth K, Müller R (2005) Moderately thermophilic Myxobacteria: Novel potential for the production of natural products isolation and characterization. Environ Microbiol 7: 874–880. doi: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2005.00761.x
![]() |
[42] |
Wenzel SC, Müller R (2009) Myxobacteria--’microbial factories' for the production of bioactive secondary metabolites. Mol Biosyst 5: 567–574. doi: 10.1039/b901287g
![]() |
[43] |
Perlova O, Gerth K, Kuhlmann S, et al. (2009) Novel expression hosts for complex secondary metabolite megasynthetases: Production of myxochromide in the thermopilic isolate Corallococcus macrosporus GT-2. Microb Cell Fact 8: 1. doi: 10.1186/1475-2859-8-1
![]() |
[44] |
Prangishvili D, Holz I, Stieger E, et al. (2000) Sulfolobicins, Specific Proteinaceous Toxins Produced by Strains of the Extremely Thermophilic Archaeal Genus Sulfolobus. J Bacteriol 182: 2985–2988. doi: 10.1128/JB.182.10.2985-2988.2000
![]() |
[45] |
Ellen AF, Rohulya O V, Fusetti F, et al. (2011) The sulfolobicin genes of Sulfolobus acidocaldarius encode novel antimicrobial proteins. J Bacteriol 193: 4380–7. doi: 10.1128/JB.05028-11
![]() |
[46] | Ritzaua M, Kellerb M, Wesselsl P, et al. (1993) New Cyclic Polysulfides from Hyperthermophilic Archaea of the Genus Thermococcus. Liebigs Ann der Chemie 91: 871–876. |
[47] |
Joly M, Attard E, Sancelme M, et al. (2013) Ice nucleation activity of bacteria isolated from cloud water. Atmos Environ 70: 392–400. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.01.027
![]() |
[48] |
Morris CE, Sands DC, Vinatzer B a, et al. (2008) The life history of the plant pathogen Pseudomonas syringae is linked to the water cycle. ISME J 2: 321–334. doi: 10.1038/ismej.2007.113
![]() |
[49] |
Watanabe M, Arai S (1994) Bacterial ice-nucleation activity and its application to freeze concentration of fresh foods for modification of their properties. J Food Eng 22: 453–473. doi: 10.1016/0260-8774(94)90047-7
![]() |
[50] |
Li B, Sun D-W (2002) Novel methods for rapid freezing and thawing of foods – a review. J Food Eng 54: 175–182. doi: 10.1016/S0260-8774(01)00209-6
![]() |
[51] | Feller G (2013) Psychrophilic enzymes: from folding to function and biotechnology. Scientifica (Cairo) 2013: 512840. |
[52] | Vojcic L, Pitzler C, Körfer G, et al. (2015) Advances in protease engineering for laundry detergents. Nat Biotechnol 32: 629–34. |
[53] |
Whyte LG, Bourbonnière L, Bellerose C, Greer CW (1999) Bioremediation Assessment of Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Soils from the High Arctic. Bioremediat J 3: 69–80. doi: 10.1080/10889869991219217
![]() |
[54] | Stallwood B, Shears J, Williams PA, Hughes KA (2005) Low temperature bioremediation of oil-contaminated soil using biostimulation and bioaugmentation with a Pseudomonas sp. from maritime Antarctica. J Appl Microbiol 99: 794–802. |
[55] |
Abe F, Horikoshi K (2001) The biotechnological potential of piezophiles. Trends Biotechnol 19: 102–108. doi: 10.1016/S0167-7799(00)01539-0
![]() |
[56] |
Zhang Y, Li X, Xiao X, Bartlett DH (2015) Current developments in marine microbiology: High-pressure biotechnology and the genetic engineering of piezophiles. Curr Opin Biotechnol 33: 157–164. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2015.02.013
![]() |
[57] |
Jebbar M, Franzetti B, Girard E, Oger P (2015) Microbial diversity and adaptation to high hydrostatic pressure in deep-sea hydrothermal vents prokaryotes. Extremophiles 19: 721–740. doi: 10.1007/s00792-015-0760-3
![]() |
[58] |
Hay S, Evans RM, Levy C, et al. (2009) Are the catalytic properties of enzymes from piezophilic organisms pressure adapted? ChemBioChem 10: 2348–2353. doi: 10.1002/cbic.200900367
![]() |
[59] | Reed CJ, Lewis H, Trejo E, et al. (2013) Protein adaptations in archaeal extremophiles. Archaea. doi: 10.1155/2013/373275. |
[60] |
Usui K, Hiraki T, Kawamoto J, et al. (2012) Eicosapentaenoic acid plays a role in stabilizing dynamic membrane structure in the deep-sea piezophile Shewanella violacea: A study employing high-pressure time-resolved fluorescence anisotropy measurement. Biochim Biophys Acta - Biomembr 1818: 574–583. doi: 10.1016/j.bbamem.2011.10.010
![]() |
[61] |
Redou V, Navarri M, Meslet-Cladiere L, et al. (2015) Species richness and adaptation of marine fungi from deep-subseafloor sediments. Appl Environ Microbiol 81: 3571–3583. doi: 10.1128/AEM.04064-14
![]() |
[62] |
Simonato F, Campanaro S, Lauro FM, et al. (2006) Piezophilic adaptation: a genomic point of view. J Biotechnol 126: 11–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2006.03.03863. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2006.03.038
![]() |
[63] |
Wright PC, Westacott RE, Burja AM (2003) Piezotolerance as a metabolic engineering tool for the biosynthesis of natural products. Biomol Eng 20: 325–331. doi: 10.1016/S1389-0344(03)00042-X
![]() |
[64] |
Johnson DB (1995) Acidophilic microbial communities: Candidates for bioremediation of acidic mine effluents. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 35: 41–58. doi: 10.1016/0964-8305(95)00065-D
![]() |
[65] | Elleuche S, Schröder C, Sahm K, Antranikian G (2014) Extremozymes-biocatalysts with unique properties from extremophilic microorganisms. Curr Opin Biotechnol 29: 116–123. |
[66] |
Baker-Austin C, Dopson M (2007) Life in acid: pH homeostasis in acidophiles. Trends Microbiol 15: 165–171. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2007.02.005
![]() |
[67] |
Dopson M, Baker-Austin C, Koppineedi PR, Bond PL (2003) Growth in sulfidic mineral environments: Metal resistance mechanisms in acidophilic micro-organisms. Microbiology 149: 1959–1970. doi: 10.1099/mic.0.26296-0
![]() |
[68] | Gemmell RT, Knowles CJ (2000) Utilisation of aliphatic compounds by acidophilic heterotrophic bacteria. The potential for bioremediation of acidic wastewaters contaminated with toxic organic compounds and heavy metals. FEMS Microbiol Lett 192: 185–190. |
[69] |
Rani A, Souche YS, Goel R (2009) Comparative assessment of in situ bioremediation potential of cadmium resistant acidophilic Pseudomonas putida 62BN and alkalophilic Pseudomonas monteilli 97AN strains on soybean. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 63: 62–66. doi: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2008.07.002
![]() |
[70] | Tindall BJ, Ross HNM, Grant WD (1984) Natronobacterium gen. nov. and Natronococcus gen. nov., Two New Genera of Haloalkaliphilic Archaebacteria. Syst Appl Microbiol 5: 41–57. |
[71] |
Duckworth AW, Grant WD, Jones BE, et al. (1996) Phylogenetic diversity of soda lake alkaliphiles. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 19: 181–191. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.1996.tb00211.x
![]() |
[72] |
Krulwich TA (1995) Alkaliphiles: “Basic” molecular problems of pH tolerance and bioenergetics. Mol Microbiol 15: 403–410. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.1995.tb02253.x
![]() |
[73] | Horikoshi K (1999) Alkaliphiles: some applications of their products for biotechnology. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 63: 735–750. |
[74] |
Fujinami S, Fujisawa M (2010) Industrial applications of alkaliphiles and their enzymes – past, present and future. Environ Technol 31: 845–856. doi: 10.1080/09593331003762807
![]() |
[75] |
Minton KW, Daly MJ (1995) A model for repair of radiation-induced DNA double-strand breaks in the extreme radiophile Deinococcus radiodurans. Bioessays 17: 457–64. doi: 10.1002/bies.950170514
![]() |
[76] |
Brim H, Venkateswaran A, Kostandarithes HM, et al. (2003) Engineering Deinococcus geothermalis for Bioremediation of High-Temperature Radioactive Waste Environments. Appl Environ Microbiol 69: 4575–4582. doi: 10.1128/AEM.69.8.4575-4582.2003
![]() |
[77] |
Nies DH (2000) Heavy metal-resistant bacteria as extremophiles: molecular physiology and biotechnological use of Ralstonia sp. CH34. Extremophiles 4: 77–82. doi: 10.1007/s007920050140
![]() |
[78] |
Adrian L, Görisch H (2002) Microbial transformation of chlorinated benzenes under anaerobic conditions. Res Microbiol 153: 131–137. doi: 10.1016/S0923-2508(02)01298-6
![]() |
1. | Fulian Yin, Xueying Shao, Biao Tang, Xinyu Xia, Jianhong Wu, Modeling and analyzing cross-transmission dynamics of related information co-propagation, 2021, 11, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-020-79503-8 | |
2. | Fulian Yin, Xueying Shao, Yifan Zhang, Xiaowei Zhu, 2020, Classification and Characteristics analysis with Dynamic Model on Public Opinion in the Chinese Sina-microblog, 978-1-7281-8448-7, 169, 10.1109/CyberC49757.2020.00035 | |
3. | Fulian Yin, Jiale Wu, Xueying Shao, Jianhong Wu, Topic reading dynamics of the Chinese Sina-Microblog, 2020, 5, 25900544, 100031, 10.1016/j.csfx.2020.100031 | |
4. | Fulian Yin, Hongyu Pang, Xinyu Xia, Xueying Shao, Jianhong Wu, COVID-19 information contact and participation analysis and dynamic prediction in the Chinese Sina-microblog, 2021, 570, 03784371, 125788, 10.1016/j.physa.2021.125788 | |
5. | Fulian Yin, Xueying Shao, Meiqi Ji, Jianhong Wu, Quantifying the Influence of Delay in Opinion Transmission of COVID-19 Information Propagation: Modeling Study, 2021, 23, 1438-8871, e25734, 10.2196/25734 | |
6. | Fulian Yin, Xinyu Xia, Nan Song, Lingyao Zhu, Jianhong Wu, Floriana Gargiulo, Quantify the role of superspreaders -opinion leaders- on COVID-19 information propagation in the Chinese Sina-microblog, 2020, 15, 1932-6203, e0234023, 10.1371/journal.pone.0234023 | |
7. | Fulian Yin, Xinyu Xia, Xiaojian Zhang, Mingjia Zhang, Jiahui Lv, Jianhong Wu, Modelling the dynamic emotional information propagation and guiding the public sentiment in the Chinese Sina-microblog, 2021, 396, 00963003, 125884, 10.1016/j.amc.2020.125884 | |
8. | Fulian Yin, Xiaowei Zhu, Xueying Shao, Xinyu Xia, Yanyan Pan, Jianhong Wu, Modeling and quantifying the influence of opinion involving opinion leaders on delayed information propagation dynamics, 2021, 08939659, 107356, 10.1016/j.aml.2021.107356 | |
9. | Xueying Shao, Hongyu Pang, Xinyu Xia, Jiahui Lv, 2020, Derived information dynamics transmission in the Chinese Sina-microblog, 978-1-7281-9623-7, 533, 10.1109/ICMEIM51375.2020.00125 | |
10. | Fulian Yin, Xiaojian Zhang, Mingjia Zhang, Xinyu Xia, Jiahui Lv, Jianhong Wu, 2020, Influence of User Emotion on Information Propagation with Public Sentiment in the Chinese Sina-microblog, 978-1-6654-2232-1, 236, 10.1109/BigDIA51454.2020.00045 | |
11. | Fulian Yin, Xinyi Tang, Tongyu Liang, Yanjing Huang, Jianhong Wu, External intervention model with direct and indirect propagation behaviors on social media platforms, 2022, 19, 1551-0018, 11380, 10.3934/mbe.2022530 | |
12. | Tinghan Yang, Zhiwei Hu, Zhuo Chen, Yaqing Liang, Fulian Yin, 2022, Influence of Active Search on Information Propagation on the Chinese Sina Microblog, 978-1-6654-8711-5, 401, 10.1109/ICCCBDA55098.2022.9778935 | |
13. | Fulian Yin, Hongyu Pang, Lingyao Zhu, Peiqi Liu, Xueying Shao, Qingyu Liu, Jianhong Wu, The role of proactive behavior on COVID-19 infordemic in the Chinese Sina-Microblog: a modeling study, 2021, 18, 1551-0018, 7389, 10.3934/mbe.2021365 | |
14. | Fulian Yin, Xinyu Xia, Yanyan Pan, Yuwei She, Xiaoli Feng, Jianhong Wu, Sentiment mutation and negative emotion contagion dynamics in social media: A case study on the Chinese Sina Microblog, 2022, 594, 00200255, 118, 10.1016/j.ins.2022.02.029 | |
15. | Fulian Yin, Zhaoliang Wu, Xueying Shao, Xinyi Tang, Tongyu Liang, Jianhong Wu, Topic-a cluster of relevant messages-propagation dynamics: A modeling study of the impact of user repeated forwarding behaviors, 2022, 127, 08939659, 107819, 10.1016/j.aml.2021.107819 | |
16. | Liyi Liu, Yan Tu, Xiaoyang Zhou, How local outbreak of COVID-19 affect the risk of internet public opinion: A Chinese social media case study, 2022, 71, 0160791X, 102113, 10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102113 | |
17. | Fulian Yin, Yanyan Pan, Xinyi Tang, Chang Wu, Zhen Jin, Jianhong Wu, An information propagation network dynamic considering multi-platform influences, 2022, 133, 08939659, 108231, 10.1016/j.aml.2022.108231 | |
18. | Jinxia Wang, Tongyu Liang, Qinghua Kuang, Xinyi Tang, Rui Ma, Fulian Yin, 2022, Combined Influence of Commenting and Forwarding on Information Propagation on the Chinese Sina Microblog, 978-1-6654-8711-5, 342, 10.1109/ICCCBDA55098.2022.9778875 | |
19. | Zhiwei Hu, Tinghan Yang, Jieling Wu, Jingyang Xu, Jiecong Lin, Fulian Yin, 2022, Modeling and Quantifying the Role of User Active Search in COVID-19 Multi-Information Analysis and Prediction in the Chinese Sina-microblog, 978-1-6654-9868-5, 1, 10.1109/DSIT55514.2022.9943853 | |
20. | Fulian Yin, Xinyi Jiang, Xiqing Qian, Xinyu Xia, Yanyan Pan, Jianhong Wu, Modeling and quantifying the influence of rumor and counter-rumor on information propagation dynamics, 2022, 162, 09600779, 112392, 10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112392 | |
21. | Fulian Yin, Yuwei She, Yanyan Pan, Xinyi Tang, Haotong Hou, Jianhong Wu, Hot-topics cross-propagation and opinion-transfer dynamics in the Chinese Sina-microblog social media: a modeling study, 2023, 00225193, 111480, 10.1016/j.jtbi.2023.111480 | |
22. | Zhiqiang Zhang, Yanjing Huang, Xinyu Xia, Yuwei She, Xinyi Jiang, Fulian Yin, 2023, Modeling and Quantification of Online and Offline Coupled Information Dissemination Networks, 9798400709449, 327, 10.1145/3650215.3650273 | |
23. | Fulian Yin, Jinxia Wang, Xinyi Jiang, Yanjing Huang, Qianyi Yang, Jianhong Wu, Modeling and analyzing an opinion network dynamics considering the environmental factor, 2023, 20, 1551-0018, 16866, 10.3934/mbe.2023752 | |
24. | Zhiqiang Zhang, Zhuo Chen, Qianyi Yang, Yaqing Liang, Hongyu Pang, Fulian Yin, Hoshang Kolivand, Anand Nayyar, 2023, Modeling and quantifying the user influence on information dissemination in the Chinese Sina-Microblog, 9781510672505, 117, 10.1117/12.3012293 | |
25. | Zhuo Yang, Yan Guo, Hongyu Pang, Fulian Yin, Performance Analysis of a Self-Organized Network Dynamics Model for Public Opinion Information, 2024, 12, 2169-3536, 55521, 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3389104 | |
26. | Teng Liu, Xiangming Hu, Qiangqiang Dong, Generation paths of online public opinion impact in public health emergency: a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis based on Chinese data, 2024, 12, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1404587 | |
27. | Bowen Li, Hua Li, Qiubai Sun, Rongjian Lv, Huining Yan, Dynamics analysis and optimal control study of uncertain information dissemination model triggered after major emergencies, 2024, 12, 2296-424X, 10.3389/fphy.2024.1349284 | |
28. | Fulian Yin, Xinyi Jiang, Jinxia Wang, Yan Guo, Yuewei Wu, Jianhong Wu, Revealing the sentiment propagation under the conscious emotional contagion mechanism in the social media ecosystem: For public opinion management, 2024, 469, 01672789, 134327, 10.1016/j.physd.2024.134327 | |
29. | Fulian Yin, Jieling Wu, Jingyang Xu, Yuwei She, Jianhong Wu, I-SFI model of propagation dynamic based on user’s interest intensity and considering birth and death rate, 2024, 30, 1387-3954, 115, 10.1080/13873954.2024.2315289 | |
30. | Fulian Yin, Xinyi Tang, Tongyu Liang, Qinghua Kuang, Jinxia Wang, Rui Ma, Fang Miao, Jianhong Wu, Coupled dynamics of information propagation and emotion influence: Emerging emotion clusters for public health emergency messages on the Chinese Sina Microblog, 2024, 639, 03784371, 129630, 10.1016/j.physa.2024.129630 | |
31. | Fulian Yin, Jinxia Wang, Hongyu Pang, Xin Pei, Zhen Jin, Jianhong Wu, Modeling and analyzing network dynamics of COVID-19 vaccine information propagation in the Chinese Sina Microblog, 2024, 1381-298X, 10.1007/s10588-024-09386-x | |
32. | Yuhang Wang, Wei Zhou, Ziang Hu, Jizhong Han, Tao Guo, 2024, CSFI for Social Media: Understanding and Predicting Cross-Community Information Propagation, 979-8-3315-2723-5, 264, 10.1109/ICTAI62512.2024.00046 | |
33. | Yuewei Wu, Zhiqiang Zhang, Jianhong Wu, Jinxia Wang, Yuanye Zhou, Fulian Yin, An advanced deep learning framework for simulating information propagation dynamics, 2025, 13, 2296-424X, 10.3389/fphy.2025.1524104 |
t(day) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
number | 10 | 198 | 737 | 2674 | 9644 | 33943 | 110751 | 550102 |
t(day) | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
number | 739491 | 835032 | 880337 | 913164 | 919055 | 924084 | 925093 | 925664 |
ℜo(actual:2.5460) | Fmax(actual:2.4724×105) | Es(actual:0.9243×106) | ||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 2.8762 | – | 3.3083 | – | 1.0824 |
Day 4 | – | 2.6504 | – | 2.7307 | – | 0.9751 |
Day 5 | – | 2.5428 | – | 2.4641 | – | 0.9228 |
Day 6 | – | 2.4803 | – | 2.3126 | – | 0.8920 |
Day 7 | 3.5855 | 2.4412 | 1.4758 | 2.2194 | 0.3920 | 0.8726 |
Day 8 | 4.2506 | 2.5546 | 4.5234 | 2.4942 | 1.0504 | 0.9286 |
Day 9 | 2.7779 | 2.5531 | 2.8837 | 2.4930 | 0.9768 | 0.9278 |
Day 10 | 2.5132 | 2.5504 | 2.4809 | 2.4866 | 0.9411 | 0.9265 |
Day 11 | 2.6986 | 2.5489 | 2.6283 | 2.4759 | 0.9189 | 0.9258 |
Day 12 | 2.6363 | 2.5490 | 2.5757 | 2.4798 | 0.9248 | 0.9258 |
Day 13 | 2.5974 | 2.5492 | 2.5285 | 2.4789 | 0.9245 | 0.9259 |
Day 14 | 2.4557 | 2.5496 | 2.3632 | 2.4796 | 0.9233 | 0.9261 |
Day 15 | 2.4561 | 2.5496 | 2.3738 | 2.4788 | 0.9272 | 0.9261 |
tb(actual:5.92day) | te(actual:12.57day) | ti(actual:6.65day) | tmax(actual:8.49day) | |||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 5.20 | – | 11.05 | – | 5.85 | – | 7.35 |
Day 4 | – | 5.67 | – | 12.03 | – | 5.85 | – | 8.08 |
Day 5 | – | 5.93 | – | 12.59 | – | 6.66 | – | 8.49 |
Day 6 | – | 6.09 | – | 12.95 | – | 6.86 | – | 8.76 |
Day 7 | 5.71 | 6.20 | 13.93 | 13.19 | 8.22 | 6.99 | 8.47 | 8.94 |
Day 8 | 6.20 | 5.90 | 14.94 | 12.52 | 9.74 | 6.62 | 8.91 | 8.46 |
Day 9 | 6.02 | 5.90 | 12.98 | 12.53 | 6.96 | 6.63 | 8.61 | 8.46 |
Day 10 | 5.93 | 5.91 | 12.56 | 12.55 | 6.63 | 6.64 | 8.50 | 8.47 |
Day 11 | 5.92 | 5.91 | 12.73 | 12.56 | 6.81 | 6.65 | 8.48 | 8.47 |
Day 12 | 5.94 | 5.91 | 12.70 | 12.56 | 6.76 | 6.65 | 8.53 | 8.47 |
Day 13 | 5.91 | 5.91 | 12.61 | 12.56 | 6.70 | 6.65 | 8.48 | 8.47 |
Day 14 | 5.90 | 5.91 | 12.44 | 12.56 | 6.54 | 6.65 | 8.46 | 8.47 |
Day 15 | 5.90 | 5.91 | 12.43 | 12.56 | 6.53 | 6.65 | 8.46 | 8.47 |
Vo(actual:0.8658×105/day) | Vd(actual:5.4538×104/day) | Va(actual:3.3461×104/day) | ||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 1.3863 | – | 8.0554 | – | 5.0948 |
Day 4 | – | 1.0199 | – | 6.2227 | – | 3.8647 |
Day 5 | – | 0.8663 | – | 5.4091 | – | 3.3299 |
Day 6 | – | 0.7800 | – | 4.9701 | – | 3.0357 |
Day 7 | 0.4813 | 0.7293 | 2.4331 | 4.7019 | 1.6161 | 2.8588 |
Day 8 | 1.5023 | 0.8773 | 6.7514 | 5.5317 | 4.6580 | 3.3926 |
Day 9 | 1.0021 | 0.8769 | 5.9390 | 5.5159 | 3.7290 | 3.3861 |
Day 10 | 0.8688 | 0.8745 | 5.4995 | 5.4869 | 3.3677 | 3.3715 |
Day 11 | 0.9241 | 0.8706 | 5.5661 | 5.4494 | 3.4737 | 3.3516 |
Day 12 | 0.8952 | 0.8721 | 5.5603 | 5.4586 | 3.4299 | 3.3573 |
Day 13 | 0.8855 | 0.8718 | 5.5105 | 5.4568 | 3.3967 | 3.3561 |
Day 14 | 0.8312 | 0.8720 | 5.3464 | 5.4582 | 3.2536 | 3.3570 |
Day 15 | 0.8349 | 0.8717 | 5.3839 | 5.4562 | 3.2732 | 3.3558 |
t(day) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
number | 10 | 198 | 737 | 2674 | 9644 | 33943 | 110751 | 550102 |
t(day) | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
number | 739491 | 835032 | 880337 | 913164 | 919055 | 924084 | 925093 | 925664 |
ℜo(actual:2.5460) | Fmax(actual:2.4724×105) | Es(actual:0.9243×106) | ||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 2.8762 | – | 3.3083 | – | 1.0824 |
Day 4 | – | 2.6504 | – | 2.7307 | – | 0.9751 |
Day 5 | – | 2.5428 | – | 2.4641 | – | 0.9228 |
Day 6 | – | 2.4803 | – | 2.3126 | – | 0.8920 |
Day 7 | 3.5855 | 2.4412 | 1.4758 | 2.2194 | 0.3920 | 0.8726 |
Day 8 | 4.2506 | 2.5546 | 4.5234 | 2.4942 | 1.0504 | 0.9286 |
Day 9 | 2.7779 | 2.5531 | 2.8837 | 2.4930 | 0.9768 | 0.9278 |
Day 10 | 2.5132 | 2.5504 | 2.4809 | 2.4866 | 0.9411 | 0.9265 |
Day 11 | 2.6986 | 2.5489 | 2.6283 | 2.4759 | 0.9189 | 0.9258 |
Day 12 | 2.6363 | 2.5490 | 2.5757 | 2.4798 | 0.9248 | 0.9258 |
Day 13 | 2.5974 | 2.5492 | 2.5285 | 2.4789 | 0.9245 | 0.9259 |
Day 14 | 2.4557 | 2.5496 | 2.3632 | 2.4796 | 0.9233 | 0.9261 |
Day 15 | 2.4561 | 2.5496 | 2.3738 | 2.4788 | 0.9272 | 0.9261 |
tb(actual:5.92day) | te(actual:12.57day) | ti(actual:6.65day) | tmax(actual:8.49day) | |||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 5.20 | – | 11.05 | – | 5.85 | – | 7.35 |
Day 4 | – | 5.67 | – | 12.03 | – | 5.85 | – | 8.08 |
Day 5 | – | 5.93 | – | 12.59 | – | 6.66 | – | 8.49 |
Day 6 | – | 6.09 | – | 12.95 | – | 6.86 | – | 8.76 |
Day 7 | 5.71 | 6.20 | 13.93 | 13.19 | 8.22 | 6.99 | 8.47 | 8.94 |
Day 8 | 6.20 | 5.90 | 14.94 | 12.52 | 9.74 | 6.62 | 8.91 | 8.46 |
Day 9 | 6.02 | 5.90 | 12.98 | 12.53 | 6.96 | 6.63 | 8.61 | 8.46 |
Day 10 | 5.93 | 5.91 | 12.56 | 12.55 | 6.63 | 6.64 | 8.50 | 8.47 |
Day 11 | 5.92 | 5.91 | 12.73 | 12.56 | 6.81 | 6.65 | 8.48 | 8.47 |
Day 12 | 5.94 | 5.91 | 12.70 | 12.56 | 6.76 | 6.65 | 8.53 | 8.47 |
Day 13 | 5.91 | 5.91 | 12.61 | 12.56 | 6.70 | 6.65 | 8.48 | 8.47 |
Day 14 | 5.90 | 5.91 | 12.44 | 12.56 | 6.54 | 6.65 | 8.46 | 8.47 |
Day 15 | 5.90 | 5.91 | 12.43 | 12.56 | 6.53 | 6.65 | 8.46 | 8.47 |
Vo(actual:0.8658×105/day) | Vd(actual:5.4538×104/day) | Va(actual:3.3461×104/day) | ||||
Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | Method 1 | Method 2 | |
Day 3 | – | 1.3863 | – | 8.0554 | – | 5.0948 |
Day 4 | – | 1.0199 | – | 6.2227 | – | 3.8647 |
Day 5 | – | 0.8663 | – | 5.4091 | – | 3.3299 |
Day 6 | – | 0.7800 | – | 4.9701 | – | 3.0357 |
Day 7 | 0.4813 | 0.7293 | 2.4331 | 4.7019 | 1.6161 | 2.8588 |
Day 8 | 1.5023 | 0.8773 | 6.7514 | 5.5317 | 4.6580 | 3.3926 |
Day 9 | 1.0021 | 0.8769 | 5.9390 | 5.5159 | 3.7290 | 3.3861 |
Day 10 | 0.8688 | 0.8745 | 5.4995 | 5.4869 | 3.3677 | 3.3715 |
Day 11 | 0.9241 | 0.8706 | 5.5661 | 5.4494 | 3.4737 | 3.3516 |
Day 12 | 0.8952 | 0.8721 | 5.5603 | 5.4586 | 3.4299 | 3.3573 |
Day 13 | 0.8855 | 0.8718 | 5.5105 | 5.4568 | 3.3967 | 3.3561 |
Day 14 | 0.8312 | 0.8720 | 5.3464 | 5.4582 | 3.2536 | 3.3570 |
Day 15 | 0.8349 | 0.8717 | 5.3839 | 5.4562 | 3.2732 | 3.3558 |