Patent Application
20080040428
Graphs and matrices are used to describe the relations among the members of social network. Each participant of the social network can be described as a node adjoining other nodes. At least one of the two adjoining nodes can contact the other of the pair directly. So the adjoining nodes represent two social actors who can interact with each other without relying on third party to act as broker.
A characteristic of the social network is that the Social Position and role of the participants can be inferenced using the network structure. The main grounds for such inference are that if two participants represent similar relation characteristics, then they have similar social roles and Social Positions. The index for measuring the above-mentioned similarity is “equivalence”, which can be divided into three kinds: structural equivalence, automorphic equivalence, and regular equivalence. The regular equivalence means that two participants have the same relation patterns with members or other participants, without considering the amount of the relation contacts. For example, a first mother and a second mother can be defined as “regular equivalents” because they have the same relation patterns with, for example, their husbands, children and in-laws.
Another characteristic of the social network is that the relationship of the identical dyad can be described by different “themes.” Themes (or motifs) are a first member's viewing perspectives of the multi-dimensional social relationship. For example, a first member's life experience can be divided into various aspects; a “theme” is a word or a term used to define one of the aspects.
The present application is intended to describe a social search mechanism. In the intended scenario, the searcher uses theme/motif as his searching key which describes the features of his target.
The invention provides a mechanism for neighbor selection, which is an indispensable process in a social network, whether this social network is a referral network or not.
The classification of adjoining nodes by an actor in a social network is a recurring scenario. This was typically implied in previous, conventional social networking referral systems developed around a single “theme”.
Previously, no referral systems have existed wherein the participants cannot be classified into service providers and consumers. One of the applicable domains, however, where it is desirable to allow node interactions beyond the limit of a two-class structure of service provider/customer is the social network. One example is a social network organized for people seeking a spouse, mate or social partner (hereinafter termed a “dating social network”).
It should be understood that in the discussion herein the dating social network is used as a possible user scenario of the present invention instead of a restrictive description of the possible applicable domains of the present invention. It also should be understood that the detailed technique and/or technology mentioned in the following discussion not be regarded as the restrictive description of the applicable domain of the present invention.
A member of a dating social network selects a possible mate or relationship partner according to Social Position and Social Attitude, among other criteria, such as, for example, physical characteristics. Social Position, in the present context, refers to the professional and/or political position a member owns, and possibly position a member holds in various groups in which he or she volunteers, wherein he or she shares the same hobbies with other group members. Social Attitude refers to the set of choices the member shall make in various social situations (realistic and/or imagined). Owing to different friend-making policy (for example, position-first or attitude-first, exception making, and considerations as to privacy protection), members of the dating social network exhibit different priority and pace as to the disclosure of different facets of their private information, as well as to the disclosure of different facets of others' private information. In the meantime, due to the importance of creditability of private information, a member of the dating social network will evaluate the creditability of obtained info through many available approaches. The different criteria of creditability of different members of the dating social network is a sound reason why the dating social network can not be deemed a referral system consisting of service providers and consumers.
Regular equivalence as described above is a suitable metric of Social Position. Regular equivalence can be used to describe a member's Social Position, and in the meantime can protect the member's privacy in a certain period of information disclosure. For example, when a member is known to receive information from and to send no information to one kind of role (“subordinate”) and/or send information to and receive no information from another kind of role (“boss”), then any increment of details in description of “boss” and “subordinate” will render a greater increment in knowledge about the member's Social Position in his or her profession without going into details of private information (for example, the member's title and salary). In this way, the system according to the invention can be devised using directed graph methods derived from graph theory to describe the mode in which a social actor interacts with his or her “boss” and/or “subordinate” in an environment defined by a “theme” (such as, for example, “profession”) in a realistic or virtual society. Such description method satisfies the need of a member to make himself or herself briefly known without disclosure of too much private information.
In a dating social network, it is a recurring scenario that a member demand his or her counterpart to make hypothetical or real choices in some interaction characteristic of interpersonal relation situations that are similar to or the same as those situation which might occur in future, in order to test the Social Attitude of the counterpart. One of the traditional methods to explore Social Attitude is psychological tests to record the test subject's reactions under preset situations. Owing to the expertise needed to devise the tests this approach is seldom adopted by ordinary people. However, modern communication means make wide use of this approach possible.
Therefore, the present invention differs from the prior art in that, whether or not a social network can be defined as a referral system consisting of “service providers” and “consumers”, members in the social network are described on the basis of “theme”, Social Position, and Social Attitudes, in order to facilitate members' classification and selection of each member's adjoining nodes in the social network.
The term “theme” in this context is to be understood as a key word related to the mission or task that a person would like to realize in his or her social network. When such a person scrutinizes his or her social network under different “themes” (tasks or missions), then the geodesic solutions are different (i.e., solutions that relate to finding the shortest or least-energy path in a real space, or in a mathematical space, such as, for example, a graph-theoretic space, are different based on the thematic environment). That is, the connecting mode of nodes and the distance between the nodes can be drastically changed.
It can be stated that the Social Positions of this person's acquaintances in this social network are different under each different “theme” (or under each different task or mission). Therefore, the “theme” and “Social Position” are delimiters of a person's social network.
To accomplish a task or mission in a social environment in an acceptable time period (or within an acceptable cost window), it can be understood that a potential difference in Social Positions is advantageous.
The Social Attitude is a person's reaction under a social context or a social situation, which requires the person to make conscious and/or subconscious decisions as to whether to share his or her resources. Such resources may constitute a kind of power within his or her own control, or a kind of access right to another highly positioned person.
In practice, a person must make a subjective estimate of his or her social network as per his or her “theme” (task or mission); however, this subjective estimate may be drastically different from the reality. Until the method described here according to an embodiment of the invention, no such tools have existed for a person to estimate the difference between the subjective estimate and the reality.
For example, is the potential difference of the key person large enough? Is the key person willing to interact with the person as expected (maybe in search of social fame)? Or is there another person (a “broker”) willing to act as an introducing intermediary to this key person? If so, what is the possible broker seeking?
Where a first member A of a social network searches an efficient path to his or her objective by consulting a second member B and/or more other members of the social network, the willingness of B and/or others to provide resources to A is usually equated to the intensity of social relationships, or tie strength. The strength of relationships (or “ties”) is typically expressed in terms of “weak measure” versus “strong measure”, where close and intimate social relationships are referred to as strong ties, and more superficial ones are weak ties. The strength of weak ties is related to the following rationale: people with characteristics different from A may give to A access to information and resources that are different from those resources personally owned by A. It is postulated in a strength-of-weak-ties proposition that social capital resulting from weak ties brings advantages in situations associated with instrumental actions, where resources dissimilar to one's own resources are important. However, the effectiveness of weak ties is hypothesized to be contingent on one's own position, with smaller positive effects expected for those with very low or very high prestige.
As to the capability to provide resources, B and/or others can be divided into resource owner, middleman, and lobbyist. As a study has shown, participants who are successful in reaching their target within six degrees of separation utilize the difference in potential energy among people. However, A's role in providing resource is different in different fields. For example, a computer expert may be a poor linguistics student and a good gardener. A usual routing approach is to find member B (and/or other members) who possesses (or possess, respectively) a “favored position” in a social network, where “a favored position measure” is defined by degrees of centrality, closeness centrality and betweenness centrality (“betweenness” is related to the numbers of paths between two nodes on which a member engages an intermediate position). These centrality metrics might be criticized because they do not take into account that strength of relationships and positions may be different in different fields, with respect to different resources, and probably a mean value might be meaningless.
A question will exist as to whether the willingness of B and/or others to provide resources and, to an extent, to trust is efficiently measured by social distance or degrees of separation. An identical B (and/or others) may be willing to provide one kind of resource to A, but meanwhile may be unwilling to provide another kind of resource to A. From another perspective, A may disclose his social role as resource owner/middleman/lobbyist to B (and/or others) according to social distance between A and B and/or others, which can be measured by degrees of separation or degree of familiarity. Or A may do so according to other metrics, such as, for example, social attitudes. The graph of A's social network, the distance of the path between the same two nodes, independent of metrics, will be of different value under different themes/motifs (or topics).
The invention provides an approach to access social resources thru weak ties. A first member A in the social network claims his/her role in social resource provision in a certain field. Further, A can define which other second member B (and/or other members), by, what criteria, are entitled to information about A's capability. By this approach, the A can not only access resources in the part of the existing social network available to A, but also can route to the part(s) of existing social network unknown to A previously.
Turning now to
At Step 130, the program code tests the search results list to see if it is null. The process can continue in two directions depending on the outcome at Step 130. If the results are null (the process returns a “yes” decision), then the process moves to Step 140. At Step 140, the server provides the resource seeker with optional terms as keywords for a next query (or an iterative query), whereupon, from Step 140, the process returns to Step 110. If at Step 130 the search result list is not null, so that the process returns a “No” decision, then the process moves to Step 150.
At Step 150, the process displays an entry or record from the result list, which indicates capabilities claimed by a current resource provider, middleman and/or lobbyist and queries the user: “Do the capabilities claimed by the current resource provider, middleman, and/or lobbyist on the list satisfy the resource seeker?” The process continues in two directions depending on the outcome at Step 150. If at Step 150 the answer to the query is “No,” then the process moves to Step 160. Step 160 moves down the result list to the next entry or record and the process returns to repeat Step 150. If the end of the list is reached the user is notified and the process can be terminated or redirected by the user (such as restarting at Step 110). If at Step 150 the answer is “Yes,” then the process moves to Step 170.
At Step 170, the process exposes to the resource seeker the requirements set by the current resource provider, middleman, and/or lobbyist. The process then moves to Step 180, where the resource seeker and the resource provider, middleman and/or lobbyist are queried as to potential capability and/or interest (willingness) to make a deal. This query step can be multi-staged and/or semi-automated, where one or both parties may have entered predetermined criteria for a deal being made and the process tests the requirements of both parties, or where one or both of the parties is queried interactively, either immediately or upon some preset schedule, as to willingness and decision to enter into a deal, partnership or other relationship.
From Step 180 the process can continue in two directions, depending on the outcome of the queries that test for deal potential. If at Step 180 the answer is “No”, i.e., the seeker and provider cannot make a deal, then the process returns to Step 160. If at Step 180 the answer is “Yes”, then the process continues to Step 190.
At Step 190 reputation is added to the parties, including to the seeker and to the provider and optionally to the middleman and/or lobbyist.
Referring now to
The at least one other server system 240, for purposes of illustration, can include a first database server 242 and a second database server 244, and may include any number of additional database servers.
The clients system 250, for purposes of illustration, can include a first client 260 and a second client 270, and may include any number of additional clients. Each client includes a number of application processes 261, an operating system 262, a hardware platform 263, and a dynamic link library 264.
One embodiment of the disclosed method utilizes the wiki tool or its like (for example, a type of collaborative software and/or website tool for collaborative authoring that allows visitors themselves to easily add, remove and otherwise edit and change some available content, sometimes without the need for registration). A resource owner, middleman and/or lobbyist may start a theme describing his position on this topic, his requirement of possible future customer on trustworthiness, and transaction terms he expected. Each entry committed by a certain resource owner, middleman, and/or lobbyist may be regarded as a blog (or weblog, being a type of website where entries are made, such as in a logbook or diary, displayed in chronological or reverse chronological order, typically combining text, images, and links to other blogs, web pages, and other media related to its topic). These blogs may be indexed into a personal tag database 222.
Theme, position, and trustworthiness are fields of the personal tag database 222. Most nouns in an encyclopedia may be used as a keyword.
There exist many possible delimiters of social position. In one embodiment of the disclosed method, betweenness centrality is used as at least one descriptive characteristic of a resource owner, middleman and/or lobbyist.
In one embodiment of the disclosed method, social attitude testing is provided to a resource owner, middleman, and/or lobbyist and to a possible customer in order to evaluate each other's trustworthiness. In another embodiment of the disclosed method, history data of a percentage of transactions successfully closed may be utilized as a tool to measure trustworthiness. In another embodiment of the disclosed method, limitations on degrees of separation may be utilized as a prerequisite to ensure a certain degree of trustworthiness.
One embodiment of the present application provides for a person to apply for a telecommunication service by providing his or her identification document and filling out necessary forms. After conceding to an exemption declaration made by service providers, he is entitled to the telecommunication service, which saves the phone number of the person's contacts on the server, and allow the applicant to name a theme which symbolizes an activity in which (1) the applicant is listed as possessing certain capabilities and being willing to provide service to others and/or (2) the applicant is listed as being acquainted with someone who possesses certain capabilities in this activity and is willing to provide brokering service to the others. Additionally, the telecommunication service allows the applicant to specify which persons in his contact list saved on the server are entitled to access and/or utilize the capabilities information described above, and which ones are not. By this means, the notion of “A is the neighborhood of B” in a field symbolized by a theme is implemented. When one of the applicant's contacts tries to reach the applicant, the applicant's phone number is available on a computing terminal or a communicating terminal to the contact. Also available is one or several tags, which could be voice tags or graph tags, specifying the activity fields in which the applicant is willing to provide service to the contact. The contact can apply for such service thru pre-set means, e.g., a speed-dialing number.
Through similar means, one applicant can also specify in a certain field of activity that he is related in a subordinate relationship to certain contacts, from whom he obtains instructions and submits reports. A person familiar with the field of activity will be able to obtain information about the applicant's social status. One of the feasible methods to express such information is by a directed graph. For instance, A and B can be two neighboring nodes in a directed graph, and a unidirectional arrow from A to B can symbolize that B obtains instruction from A, while A does not obtain instruction from B. Such graphs comprising unidirectional arrows are able to be shown on a computing terminal or a telecommunication terminal.
Referring to
Still referring to
While the present invention has been described in conjunction with a preferred embodiment, one of ordinary skill, after reading the foregoing specification, will be able to effect various changes, substitutions of equivalents, and other alterations to the compositions and methods set forth herein. It is therefore intended that the protection granted by Letters Patent hereon be limited only by the appended claims and equivalents thereof.
Additionally, it will be appreciated that many aspects of implementing communications networks in the context of social networks are known to those skilled in the art and that a subset of those aspects can be utilized in the context of the present invention to provide the embodiments described herein. In this regard, the following references are provided and are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety into this application.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 200610026085.6 | Apr 2006 | CN | national |
