Results 1 - 10
of
67
The Singularity is Not Near: Slowing Growth of Wikipedia
"... Prior research on Wikipedia has characterized the growth in content and editors as being fundamentally exponential in nature, extrapolating current trends into the future. We show that recent editing activity suggests that Wikipedia growth has slowed, and perhaps plateaued, indicating that it may ha ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 65 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Prior research on Wikipedia has characterized the growth in content and editors as being fundamentally exponential in nature, extrapolating current trends into the future. We show that recent editing activity suggests that Wikipedia growth has slowed, and perhaps plateaued, indicating that it may have come against its limits to growth. We measure growth, population shifts, and patterns of editor and administrator activities, contrasting these against past results where possible. Both the rate of page growth and editor growth has declined. As growth has declined, there are indicators of increased coordination and overhead costs, exclusion of newcomers, and resistance to new edits. We discuss some possible explanations for these new developments in Wikipedia including decreased opportunities for sharing existing knowledge and increased bureaucratic stress on the socio-technical system itself.
Articulations of Wikiwork: Uncovering Valued Work in Wikipedia Through Barnstars
- In Proc. CSCW 2008, ACM Press
, 2008
"... Successful online communities have complex cooperative arrangements, articulations of work, and integration practices. They require technical infrastructure to support a broad division of labor. Yet the research literature lacks empirical studies that detail which types of work are valued by partici ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 55 (6 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Successful online communities have complex cooperative arrangements, articulations of work, and integration practices. They require technical infrastructure to support a broad division of labor. Yet the research literature lacks empirical studies that detail which types of work are valued by participants in an online community. A content analysis of Wikipedia barnstars – personalized tokens of appreciation given to participants – reveals a wide range of valued work extending far beyond simple editing to include social support, administrative actions, and types of articulation work. Our analysis develops a theoretical lens for understanding how wiki software supports the creation of articulations of work. We give implications of our results for communities engaged in large-scale collaborations.
Detecting Wikipedia Vandalism via Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Revision Metadata
, 2010
"... Blatantly unproductive edits undermine the quality of the collaboratively-edited encyclopedia, Wikipedia. They not only disseminate dishonest and offensive content, but force editors to waste time undoing such acts of vandalism. Language-processing has been applied to combat these malicious edits, b ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 36 (16 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Blatantly unproductive edits undermine the quality of the collaboratively-edited encyclopedia, Wikipedia. They not only disseminate dishonest and offensive content, but force editors to waste time undoing such acts of vandalism. Language-processing has been applied to combat these malicious edits, but as with email spam, these filters are evadable and computationally complex. Meanwhile, recent research has shown spatial and temporal features effective in mitigating email spam, while being lightweight and robust. In this paper, we leverage the spatio-temporal properties of revision metadata to detect vandalism on Wikipedia. An administrative form of reversion called rollback enables the tagging of malicious edits, which are contrasted with nonoffending edits in numerous dimensions. Crucially, none of these features require inspection of the article or revision text. Ultimately, a classifier is produced which flags vandalism at performance comparable to the natural-language efforts we intend to complement (85 % accuracy at 50 % recall). The classifier is scalable (processing 100+ edits a second) and has been used to locate over 5,000 manually-confirmed incidents of vandalism outside our labeled set.
Measuring Author Contributions to the Wikipedia
, 2008
"... We consider the problem of measuring user contributions to versioned, collaborative bodies of information, such as wikis. Measuring the contributions of individual authors can be used to divide revenue, to recognize merit, to award status promotions, and to choose the order of authors when citing th ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 29 (3 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We consider the problem of measuring user contributions to versioned, collaborative bodies of information, such as wikis. Measuring the contributions of individual authors can be used to divide revenue, to recognize merit, to award status promotions, and to choose the order of authors when citing the content. In the context of the Wikipedia, previous works on author contribution estimation have focused on two criteria: the total text created, and the total number of edits performed. We show that neither of these criteria work well: both techniques are vulnerable to manipulation, and the totaltext criterion fails to reward people who polish or re-arrange the content. We consider and compare various alternative criteria that take into account the quality of a contribution, in addition to the quantity, and we analyze how the criteria differ in the way they rank authors according to their contributions. As an outcome of this study, we propose to adopt total edit longevity as a measure of author contribution. Edit longevity is resistant to simple attacks, since edits are counted towards an author’s contribution only if other authors accept the contribution. Edit longevity equally rewards people who create content, and people who rearrange or polish the content. Finally, edit longevity distinguishes the people who contribute little (who have contribution close to zero) from spammers or vandals, whose contribution quickly grows negative.
Readers are Not Free-Riders: Reading as a Form of Participation on Wikipedia
"... The success of Wikipedia as a large-scale collaborative effort has spurred researchers to examine the motivations and behaviors of Wikipedia’s participants. However, this research has tended to focus on active involvement rather than more common forms of participation such as reading. In this paper ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 26 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The success of Wikipedia as a large-scale collaborative effort has spurred researchers to examine the motivations and behaviors of Wikipedia’s participants. However, this research has tended to focus on active involvement rather than more common forms of participation such as reading. In this paper we argue that Wikipedia’s readers should not all be characterized as free-riders – individuals who knowingly choose to take advantage of others ’ effort. Furthermore, we illustrate how readers provide a valuable service to Wikipedia. Finally, we use the notion of legitimate peripheral participation to argue that reading is a gateway activity through which newcomers learn about Wikipedia. We find support for our arguments in the results of a survey of Wikipedia usage and knowledge. Implications for future research and design are discussed.
Detecting Wikipedia vandalism with active learning and statistical language models
- In Proceedings of the 4th workshop on Information credibility (WICOW '10). ACM
, 2010
"... ABSTRACT This paper proposes an active learning approach using language model statistics to detect Wikipedia vandalism. Wikipedia is a popular and influential collaborative information system. The collaborative nature of authoring, as well as the high visibility of its content, have exposed Wikiped ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 25 (4 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
ABSTRACT This paper proposes an active learning approach using language model statistics to detect Wikipedia vandalism. Wikipedia is a popular and influential collaborative information system. The collaborative nature of authoring, as well as the high visibility of its content, have exposed Wikipedia articles to vandalism. Vandalism is defined as malicious editing intended to compromise the integrity of the content of articles. Extensive manual efforts are being made to combat vandalism and an automated approach to alleviate the laborious process is needed. This paper builds statistical language models, constructing distributions of words from the revision history of Wikipedia articles. As vandalism often involves the use of unexpected words to draw attention, the fitness (or lack thereof) of a new edit when compared with language models built from previous versions may well indicate that an edit is a vandalism instance. In addition, the paper adopts an active learning model to solve the problem of noisy and incomplete labeling of Wikipedia vandalism. The Wikipedia domain with its revision histories offers a novel context in which to explore the potential of language models in characterizing author intention. As the experimental results presented in the paper demonstrate, these models hold promise for vandalism detection.
Assessing the quality of Wikipedia articles with lifecycle based metrics
- In Proc. WikiSym
, 2009
"... The main feature of the free online-encyclopedia Wikipedia is the wiki-tool, which allows viewers to edit the articles directly in the web browser. As a weakness of this openness for example the possibility of manipulation and vandalism cannot be ruled out, so that the quality of any given Wikipedia ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 22 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The main feature of the free online-encyclopedia Wikipedia is the wiki-tool, which allows viewers to edit the articles directly in the web browser. As a weakness of this openness for example the possibility of manipulation and vandalism cannot be ruled out, so that the quality of any given Wikipedia article is not guaranteed. Hence the automatic quality assessment has been becoming a high active research field. In this paper we offer new metrics for an efficient quality measurement. The metrics are based on the lifecycles of low and high quality articles, which refer to the changes of the persistent and transient contributions throughout the entire life span. Categories and Subject Descriptors
Detecting Wikipedia Vandalism Using WikiTrust
, 2010
"... WikiTrust is a reputation system for Wikipedia authors and content. WikiTrust computes three main quantities: edit quality, author reputation, and content reputation. The edit quality measures how well each edit, that is, each change introduced in a revision, is preserved in subsequent revisions. A ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 15 (4 self)
- Add to MetaCart
WikiTrust is a reputation system for Wikipedia authors and content. WikiTrust computes three main quantities: edit quality, author reputation, and content reputation. The edit quality measures how well each edit, that is, each change introduced in a revision, is preserved in subsequent revisions. Authors who perform good quality edits gain reputation, and text which is revised by several high-reputation authors gains reputation. Since vandalism on the Wikipedia is usually performed by anonymous or new users (not least because long-time vandals end up banned), and is usually reverted in a reasonably short span of time, edit quality, author reputation, and content reputation are obvious candidates as features to identify vandalism on the Wikipedia. Indeed, using the full set of features computed by WikiTrust, we have been able to construct classifiers that identify vandalism with a recall of 83.5%, a precision of 48.5%, and a false positive rate of 8%, for an area under the ROC curve of 93.4%. If we limit ourselves to the set of features available at the time an edit is made (when the edit quality is still unknown), the classifier achieves a recall of 77.1%, a precision of 36.9%, and a false positive rate of 12.2%, for an area under the ROC curve of 90.4%. Using these classifiers, we have implemented a simple Web API that provides the vandalism estimate for every revision of the English Wikipedia. The API can be used both to identify vandalism that needs to be reverted, and to select highquality, non-vandalized recent revisions of any given Wikipedia article. These recent high-quality revisions can be included in static snapshots of the Wikipedia, or they can be used whenever tolerance to vandalism is low (as in a school setting, or whenever the material is widely disseminated).
Mining naturally-occurring corrections and paraphrases from wikipedias revision history
- European Language Resources Association
, 2010
"... Naturally-occurring instances of linguistic phenomena are important both for training and for evaluating automatic text processing. When available in large quantities, they also prove interesting material for linguistic studies. In this article, we present WiCoPaCo (Wikipedia Correction and Paraphra ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 14 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Naturally-occurring instances of linguistic phenomena are important both for training and for evaluating automatic text processing. When available in large quantities, they also prove interesting material for linguistic studies. In this article, we present WiCoPaCo (Wikipedia Correction and Paraphrase Corpus), a new freely-available resource built by automatically mining Wikipedia’s revision history. The WiCoPaCo corpus focuses on local modifications made by human revisors and include various types of corrections (such as spelling error or typographical corrections) and rewritings, which can be categorized broadly into meaning-preserving and meaning-altering revisions. We present an initial hand-built typology of these revisions, but the resource allows for any possible annotation scheme. We discuss the main motivations for building such a resource and describe the main technical details guiding its construction. We also present applications and data analysis on French and report initial results on spelling error correction and morphosyntactic rewriting. The WiCoPaCo corpus can be freely downloaded from
Robust Content-Driven Reputation
, 2008
"... In content-driven reputation systems for collaborative content, users gain or lose reputation according to how their contributions fare: authors of long-lived contributions gain reputation, while authors of reverted contributions lose reputation. Existing content-driven systems are prone to Sybil at ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 8 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In content-driven reputation systems for collaborative content, users gain or lose reputation according to how their contributions fare: authors of long-lived contributions gain reputation, while authors of reverted contributions lose reputation. Existing content-driven systems are prone to Sybil attacks, in which multiple identities, controlled by the same person, perform coordinated actions to increase their reputation. We show that content-driven reputation systems can be made resistent to such attacks by taking advantage of the fact that the reputation increments and decrements depend on content modifications, which are visible to all. We present an algorithm for content-driven reputation that prevents a set of identities from increasing their maximum reputation without doing any useful work. Here, work is considered useful if it causes content to evolve in a direction that is consistent with the actions of high-reputation users. We argue that the content modifications that require no effort, such as the insertion or deletion of arbitrary text, are invariably non-useful. We prove a truthfullness result for the resulting system, stating that users who wish to perform a contribution do not gain by employing complex contribution schemes, compared to simply performing the contribution at once. In particular, splitting the contribution in multiple portions, or employing the coordinated actions of multiple identities, do not yield additional reputation. Taken together, these results indicate that content-driven systems can be made robust with respect to Sybil attacks.
