Detecting Bots and Assessing Their Impact in Social Networks

References

• Acemoğlu D, Como G, Fagnani F, Ozdaglar A (2013) Opinion fluctuations and disagreement in social networks. Math. Oper. Res. 38(1):1–27.Link, Google Scholar
• Acemoğlu D, Dahleh MA, Lobel I, Ozdaglar A (2011) Bayesian learning in social networks. Rev. Econom. Stud. 78(4):1201–1236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aggarwal CC (2014) Data Classification: Algorithms and Applications (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alvisi L, Clement A, Epasto A, Lattanzi S, Panconesi A (2013) Sok: The evolution of sybil defense via social networks. Proc. IEEE Sympos. Security Privacy (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 382–396.Google Scholar
• Aral S, Eckles D (2019) Protecting elections from social media manipulation. Sci. 365(6456):858–861.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Badawy A, Ferrara E, Lerman K (2018) Analyzing the digital traces of political manipulation: The 2016 Russian interference Twitter campaign. Preprint, submitted February 12, https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.04291.Google Scholar
• Banerjee A (1992) A simple model of herd behavior. Quart. J. Econom. 107(3):797–817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banerjee A, Fudenberg D (2004) Word-of-mouth learning. Games Econom. Behav. 46(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barahona F (1982) On the computational complexity of Ising spin glass models. J. Phys. Math. General 15(10):3241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bastos MT, Mercea D (2019) The Brexit botnet and user-generated hyperpartisan news. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 37(1):38–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benevenuto F, Magno G, Rodrigues T, Almeida V (2010) Detecting spammers on Twitter. Proc. 7th Annual Collaboration Electr. Messaging Anti-Abuse Spam Conf. (ACM, New York).Google Scholar
• Benevenuto F, Rodrigues T, Almeida V, Almeida J, Goncalves M (2009) Detecting spammers and content promoters in online video social networks. Proc. 32nd Internat. ACM SIGIR Conf. Res. Development Inform. Retrieval (ACM, New York), 620–627.Google Scholar
• Bessi A, Ferrara E (2016) Social bots distort the 2016 US presidential election online discussion. First Monday 21(11), http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v21i11.7090.Google Scholar
• Beutel A, Xu W, Guruswami V, Palow C, Faloutsos C (2013) CopyCatch: Stopping group attacks by spotting lockstep behavior in social networks. Proc. 22nd Internat. Conf. World Wide Web (ACM, New York), 119–130.Google Scholar
• Bikhchandani S, Hirshleifer D, Welch I (1992) A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. J. Political Econom. 100(5):992–1026.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boshmaf Y, Muslukhov I, Beznosov K, Ripeanu M (2013) Design and analysis of a social botnet. Comput. Networks 57(2):556–578.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Byrnes N (2016) How the bot-y politic influenced this election. MIT Technol. Rev. (November 8), https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/11/08/69674/how-the-bot-y-politic-influenced-this-election.Google Scholar
• Cao Q, Sirivianos M, Yang X, Pregueiro T (2012) Aiding the detection of fake accounts in large scale social online services. Proc. 9th USENIX Conf. Networked Systems Design Implementation, San Jose, CA, April 25–27, 197–210.Google Scholar
• Cao Q, Yang X, Yu J, Palow C (2014) Uncovering large groups of active malicious accounts in online social networks. Proc. 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conf. Comput. Comm. Security (ACM, New York), 477–488.Google Scholar
• Chatterjee S, Seneta E (1977) Toward consensus: Some convergence theorems on repeated averaging. J. Appl. Probab. 14(1):89–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chinellato DD, Epstein IR, Braha D, Bar-Yam Y, de Aguiar MAM (2015) Dynamical response of networks under external perturbations: Exact results. J. Statist. Phys. 159(2):221–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chollet F (2015) keras, https://github.com/fchollet/keras.Google Scholar
• Chu Z, Gianvecchio S, Wang H, Jajodia S (2012) Detecting automation of Twitter accounts: Are you a human, bot, or cyborg? IEEE Trans. Dependable Secure Comput. 9(6):811–824.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clifford P, Sudbury A (1973) A model for spatial conflict. Biometrika 60(3):581–588.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cox JT, Griffeath D (1986) Diffusive clustering in the two dimensional voter model. Ann. Probab. 14(2):347–370.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Danezis G, Mittal P (2009) Sybilinfer: Detecting sybil nodes using social networks. Proc. NDSS Sympos., 1–15.Google Scholar
• Davis CA, Varol O, Ferrara E, Flammini A, Menczer F (2016) BotOrNot: A system to evaluate social bots. Proc. 25th Internat. Conf. Companion World Wide Web (International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Geneva), 273–274.Google Scholar
• DeGroot MH (1974) Reaching a consensus. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 69(345):118–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Egele M, Stringhini G, Kruegel C, Vigna G (2013) COMPA: Detecting compromised accounts on social networks. Proc. NDSS Sympos., 1–17.Google Scholar
• Elovici Y, Fire M, Herzberg A, Shulman H (2014) Ethical considerations when employing fake identities in online social networks for research. Sci. Engrg. Ethics 20(4):1027–1043.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fandos N, Shane S (2017) Senator berates Twitter over ‘inadequate’ inquiry into Russian meddling. New York Times (September 28), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/28/us/politics/twitter-russia-interference-2016-election-investigation.html.Google Scholar
• Ferrara E (2017) Disinformation and social bot operations in the run up to the 2017 French presidential election. First Monday 22(8), https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v22i8.8005.Google Scholar
• Ferrara E, Varol O, Davis C, Menczer F, Flammini A (2016) The rise of social bots. Commun. ACM 59(7):96–104.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freitas C, Benevenuto F, Ghosh S, Veloso A (2015) Reverse engineering socialbot infiltration strategies in Twitter. Proc. Internat. Conf. Adv. Soc. Network Anal. Mining (Curran Associates, Red Hook, NY), 25–32.Google Scholar
• Galam S, Jacobs F (2007) The role of inflexible minorities in the breaking of democratic opinion dynamics. Physica A Statist. Mech. Appl. 381:366–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghaderi J, Srikant R (2013) Opinion dynamics in social networks: A local interaction game with stubborn agents. Proc. Amer. Control Conf. (Curran Associates, Red Hook, NY), 1982–1987.Google Scholar
• Ghosh S, Viswanath B, Kooti F, Sharma NK, Korlam G, Benevenuto F, Ganguly N, Gummadi KP (2012) Understanding and combating link farming in the Twitter social network. Proc. 21st Internat. Conf. World Wide Web (ACM, New York), 61–70.Google Scholar
• Gray L (1986) Duality for general attractive spin systems with applications in one dimension. Ann. Probab. 14(2):371–396.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guilbeault D, Woolley S (2016) How Twitter bots are shaping the election. The Atlantic (November 1), https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/11/election-bots/506072/.Google Scholar
• Han B, Cook P, Baldwin T (2014) Text-based Twitter user geolocation prediction. J. Artificial Intelligence Res. 49:451–500.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holley RA, Liggett TM (1975) Ergodic theorems for weakly interacting infinite systems and the voter model. Ann. Probab. 3(4):643–663.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hunter DS, Zaman T (2018) Optimizing opinions with stubborn agents under time-varying dynamics. Preprint, submitted June 29, https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.11253.Google Scholar
• Hwang T, Pearce I, Nanis M (2012) Socialbots: Voices from the fronts. Interactions 19(2):38–45.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ising E (1925) Beitrag zur theorie des ferromagnetismus. Zeitschrift Phys. 31(1):253–258.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jackson MO (2010) Social and Economic Networks (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jadbabaie A, Lin J, Morse AS (2003) Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules. IEEE Trans. Automatic Control 48(6):988–1001.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jurgens D, Finethy T, McCorriston J, Yi TX, Ruths D (2015) Geolocation prediction in Twitter using social networks: A critical analysis and review of current practice. Proc. 9th Internat. AAAI Conf. Web Soc. Media (AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA), 188–197.Google Scholar
• Kempe D, Kleinberg J, Tardos É (2003) Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. Proc. 9th ACM SIGKDD Internat. Conf. Knowledge Discovery Data Mining (ACM, New York), 137–146.Google Scholar
• Kempe D, Kleinberg J, Tardos É (2005) Influential nodes in a diffusion model for social networks. Caires L, Italiano GF, Monteiro L, Palamidessi C, Yung M, eds. Automata, Languages and Programming (Springer, Berlin), 1127–1138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim Y (2014) Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification. Preprint, submitted August 25, https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.5882.Google Scholar
• Klausen J, Marks CE, Zaman T (2018) Finding extremists in online social networks. Oper. Res. 66(4):957–976.Link, Google Scholar
• Kolmogorov V, Zabih R (2002) What energy functions can be minimized via graph cuts? Heyden A, Sparr G, Nielsen M, Johansen P, eds. Proc. 7th Eur. Conf. Comput. Vision—Part III (Springer, Berlin), 65–81.Google Scholar
• Krapivsky PL (1992) Kinetics of monomer-monomer surface catalytic reactions. Phys. Rev. A 45(2):1067.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee K, Eoff BD, Caverlee J (2011) Seven months with the devils: A long-term study of content polluters on Twitter. Proc. 5th Internat. AAAI Conf. Weblogs Social Media (AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA), 185–192.Google Scholar
• Liggett TM (2012) Interacting Particle Systems (Springer, Berlin).Google Scholar
• Littman J, Wrubel L, Kerchner D (2016) United States presidential election tweet IDs, Harvard Dataverse, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/PDI7IN.Google Scholar
• Marks C, Zaman T (2017) Building a location-based set of social media users. Preprint, submitted November 4, https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.01481.Google Scholar
• Martins ACR, Galam S (2013) Building up of individual inflexibility in opinion dynamics. Phys. Rev. E 87(4):042807.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Messias J, Schmidt L, Oliveira R, Benevenuto F (2013) You followed my bot! Transforming robots into influential users in Twitter. First Monday 18(7), https://doi.org/ 10.5210/fm.v18i7.4217.Google Scholar
• Mobilia M (2003) Does a single zealot affect an infinite group of voters? Phys. Rev. Lett. 91(2):028701.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mobilia M, Petersen A, Redner S (2007) On the role of zealotry in the voter model. J. Statist. Mech. Theory Experiment 2007:P08029.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mønsted B, Sapieżyński P, Ferrara E, Lehmann S (2017) Evidence of complex contagion of information in social media: An experiment using Twitter bots. PLoS One 12(9):e0184148.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moussaïd M, Kämmer JE, Analytis PP, Neth H (2013) Social influence and the collective dynamics of opinion formation. PLoS One 8(11):e78433.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olshevsky A, Tsitsiklis JN (2009) Convergence speed in distributed consensus and averaging. SIAM J. Control Optim. 48(1):33–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paradise A, Shabtai A, Puzis R, Elyashar A, Elovici Y, Roshandel M, Peylo C (2017) Creation and management of social network honeypots for detecting targeted cyber attacks. IEEE Trans. Comput. Soc. Syst. 4(3):65–79.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parlapiano A, Lee JC (2018) The Propaganda Tools Used by Russians to Influence the 2016 Election. New York Times (February 16), https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/16/us/politics/russia-propaganda-election-2016.html.Google Scholar
• Price M (2018) Democrats urge Facebook and Twitter to probe Russian bots. CNET (January 23), https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-and-twitter-asked-again-to-investigate-russian-bots/.Google Scholar
• Ratkiewicz J, Conover M, Meiss MR, Gonçalves B, Flammini A, Menczer F (2011) Detecting and tracking political abuse in social media. Proc. 5th Internat. AAAI Conf. Weblogs Social Media (AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA), 297–304.Google Scholar
• Rogers EM, Bhowmik DK (1970) Homophily-heterophily: Relational concepts for communication research. Public Opinion Quart. 34(4):523–538.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rubin DB (2005) Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 100(469):322–331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shane S (2017) The fake Americans Russia created to influence the election. New York Times (September 7), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/politics/russia-facebook-twitter-election.html.Google Scholar
• Sood V, Redner S (2005) Voter model on heterogeneous graphs. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94(17):178701.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stein T, Chen E, Mangla K (2011) Facebook immune system. Proc. 4th Workshop Soc. Network Systems (ACM, New York), 1–8.Google Scholar
• Summers E (2017a) Macron Leaks tweets (May 17), https://archive.org/details/MacronleaksTweets.Google Scholar
• Summers E (2017b) BlackLivesMatter tweets 2016 (October 17), https://archive.org/details/blacklivesmatter-tweets-2016.txt.Google Scholar
• Syeed N (2017) Pro-Russian bots sharpen online attacks for 2018 U.S. vote. Bloomberg (September 1), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-01/russia-linked-bots-hone-online-attack-plans-for-2018-u-s-vote.Google Scholar
• Thomas K, Grier C, Song D, Paxson V (2011) Suspended accounts in retrospect: An analysis of Twitter spam. Proc. 2011 ACM SIGCOMM Conf. Internet Measurement (ACM, New York), 243–258.Google Scholar
• Timberg C, Dwoskin E (2018) Twitter is sweeping out fake accounts like never before, putting user growth at risk. Washington Post (July 6), https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/07/06/twitter-is-sweeping-out-fake-accounts-like-never-before-putting-user-growth-risk/.Google Scholar
• Tran DN, Min B, Li J, Subramanian L (2009) Sybil-resilient online content voting. Proc. 6th USENIX Sympos. Networked Systems Design Implementation, 15–28.Google Scholar
• Tsitsiklis JN (1984) Problems in decentralized decision making and computation. Technical report, Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Tsitsiklis J, Bertsekas D, Athans M (1986) Distributed asynchronous deterministic and stochastic gradient optimization algorithms. IEEE Trans. Automatic Control 31(9):803–812.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Twitter (2012) Using the Twitter search API (October), https://dev.twitter.com/docs/using-search.Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Defense (2012) Information operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Publication 3-13, Department of Defense, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Vassio L, Fagnani F, Frasca P, Ozdaglar A (2014) Message passing optimization of harmonic influence centrality. IEEE Trans. Control Network Systems 1(1):109–120.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Viswanath B, Bashir MA, Crovella M, Guha S, Gummadi KP, Krishnamurthy B, Mislove A (2014) Towards detecting anomalous user behavior in online social networks. Proc. 23rd USENIX Security Sympos., 223–238.Google Scholar
• Vosoughi S, Roy D, Aral S (2018) The spread of true and false news online. Science 359(6380):1146–1151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang AH (2010) Detecting spam bots in online social networking sites: A machine learning approach. Data Appl. Security Privacy XXIV (Springer, Berlin), 335–342.Google Scholar
• Wang G, Konolige T, Wilson C, Wang X , Zheng H, Zhao BY (2013) You are how you click: Clickstream analysis for Sybil detection. Proc. 22nd USENIX Security Sympos., 241–256.Google Scholar
• Wang G, Mohanlal M, Wilson C, Wang X, Metzger M, Zheng H, Zhao BY (2012) Social Turing tests: Crowdsourcing sybil detection. Preprint, submitted May 17, https://arxiv.org/abs/1205.3856.Google Scholar
• Wintour P (2018) Russian bid to influence Brexit vote detailed in new US senate report. The Guardian (January 10), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/10/russian-influence-brexit-vote-detailed-us-senate-report.Google Scholar
• Wu F, Huberman BA (2004) Social structure and opinion formation. Preprint, submitted July 9, https://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0407252.Google Scholar
• Yang Z, Wilson C, Wang X, Gao T, Zhao BY, Dai Y (2014) Uncovering social network Sybils in the wild. ACM Trans. Knowledge Discovery Data 8(1):2.Google Scholar
• Yardi S, Romero D, Schoenebeck G, Boyd D (2009) Detecting spam in a Twitter network. First Monday 15(1), https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/download/2793/2431.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yildiz E, Ozdaglar A, Acemoglu D, Saberi A, Scaglione A (2013) Binary opinion dynamics with stubborn agents. ACM Trans. Econom. Comput. 1(4):19.Google Scholar
• Yu H, Kaminsky M, Gibbons PB, Flaxman A (2006) SybilGuard: Defending against Sybil attacks via social networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Comm. Rev. 36(4):267–278.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yu H, Gibbons PB, Kaminsky M, Xiao F (2008) SybilLimit: A near-optimal social network defense against sybil attacks. Proc. IEEE Sympos. Security Privacy (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 3–17.Google Scholar
• Zabih R, Kolmogorov V (2004) Spatially coherent clustering using graph cuts. Proc. 2004 IEEE Comput. Soc. Conf. Comput. Vision Pattern Recognition, vol. 2 (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), II-437–II-444.Google Scholar
• Zangerle E, Specht G (2014) Sorry, I was hacked: A classification of compromised Twitter accounts. Proc. 29th Annual ACM Sympos. Appl. Comput. (ACM, New York), 587–593.Google Scholar