Edit history

From WikiPapers
Revision as of 17:37, March 10, 2013 by Emijrp (Talk | contribs) (Text replace - "<h2> Datasets </h2> There is no datasets for this keyword. <h2> Tools </h2> There is no tools for this keyword. <br clear="all" /> <h2> Publications </h2> There is no publications with this keyword." to "")

Jump to: navigation, search

edit history is included as keyword or extra keyword in 0 datasets, 0 tools and 7 publications.

Datasets

There is no datasets for this keyword.

Tools

There is no tools for this keyword.


Publications

Title Author(s) Published in Language DateThis property is a special property in this wiki. Abstract R C
Tracking topics on revision graphs of wikipedia edit history Li B.
Wu J.
Mizuho Iwaihara
Lecture Notes in Computer Science English 2014 Wikipedia is known as the largest online encyclopedia, in which articles are constantly contributed and edited by users. Past revisions of articles after edits are also accessible from the public for confirming the edit process. However, the degree of similarity between revisions is very high, making it difficult to generate summaries for these small changes from revision graphs of Wikipedia edit history. In this paper, we propose an approach to give a concise summary to a given scope of revisions, by utilizing supergrams, which are consecutive unchanged term sequences. 0 0
Assessing quality score of wikipedia articles using mutual evaluation of editors and texts Yu Suzuki
Masatoshi Yoshikawa
International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings English 2013 In this paper, we propose a method for assessing quality scores of Wikipedia articles by mutually evaluating editors and texts. Survival ratio based approach is a major approach to assessing article quality. In this approach, when a text survives beyond multiple edits, the text is assessed as good quality, because poor quality texts have a high probability of being deleted by editors. However, many vandals, low quality editors, delete good quality texts frequently, which improperly decreases the survival ratios of good quality texts. As a result, many good quality texts are unfairly assessed as poor quality. In our method, we consider editor quality score for calculating text quality score, and decrease the impact on text quality by vandals. Using this improvement, the accuracy of the text quality score should be improved. However, an inherent problem with this idea is that the editor quality scores are calculated by the text quality scores. To solve this problem, we mutually calculate the editor and text quality scores until they converge. In this paper, we prove that the text quality score converges. We did our experimental evaluation, and confirmed that our proposed method could accurately assess the text quality scores. Copyright is held by the owner/author(s). 0 0
Effects of implicit positive ratings for quality assessment of Wikipedia articles Yu Suzuki Journal of Information Processing English 2013 In this paper, we propose a method to identify high-quality Wikipedia articles by using implicit positive ratings. One of the major approaches for assessing Wikipedia articles is a text survival ratio based approach. In this approach, when a text survives beyond multiple edits, the text is assessed as high quality. However, the problem is that many low quality articles are misjudged as high quality, because every editor does not always read the whole article. If there is a low quality text at the bottom of a long article, and the text has not seen by the other editors, then the text survives beyond many edits, and the text is assessed as high quality. To solve this problem, we use a section and a paragraph as a unit instead of a whole page. In our method, if an editor edits an article, the system considers that the editor gives positive ratings to the section or the paragraph that the editor edits. From experimental evaluation, we confirmed that the proposed method could improve the accuracy of quality values for articles. 0 0
Mutual Evaluation of Editors and Texts for Assessing Quality of Wikipedia Articles Yu Suzuki
Masatoshi Yoshikawa
WikiSym English August 2012 In this paper, we propose a method to identify good quality Wikipedia articles by mutually evaluating editors and texts. A major approach for assessing article quality is a text survival ratio based approach. In this approach, when a text survives beyond multiple edits, the text is assessed as good quality. This approach assumes that poor quality texts are deleted by editors with high possibility. However, many vandals delete good quality texts frequently, then the survival ratios of good quality texts are improperly decreased by vandals. As a result, many good quality texts are unfairly assessed as poor quality. In our method, we consider editor quality for calculating text quality, and decrease the impacts on text qualities by the vandals who has low quality. Using this improvement, the accuracy of the text quality should be improved. However, an inherent problem of this idea is that the editor qualities are calculated by the text qualities. To solve this problem, we mutually calculate the editor and text qualities until they converge. We did our experimental evaluation, and we confirmed that the proposed method could accurately assess the text qualities. 0 0
Assessing quality values of Wikipedia articles using implicit positive and negative ratings Yu Suzuki Lecture Notes in Computer Science English 2012 In this paper, we propose a method to identify high-quality Wikipedia articles by mutually evaluating editors and text using implicit positive and negative ratings. One of major approaches for assessing Wikipedia articles is a text survival ratio based approach. However, the problem of this approach is that many low quality articles are misjudged as high quality, because of two issues. This is because, every editor does not always read the whole articles. Therefore, if there is a low quality text at the bottom of a long article, and the text have not seen by the other editors, then the text survives beyond many edits, and the survival ratio of the text is high. To solve this problem, we use a section or a paragraph as a unit of remaining instead of a whole page. This means that if an editor edits an article, the system treats that the editor gives positive ratings to the section or the paragraph that the editor edits. This is because, we believe that if editors edit articles, the editors may not read the whole page, but the editors should read the whole sections or paragraphs, and delete low-quality texts. From experimental evaluation, we confirmed that the proposed method could improve the accuracy of quality values for articles. 0 0
Mutual evaluation of editors and texts for assessing quality of Wikipedia articles Yu Suzuki
Masatoshi Yoshikawa
WikiSym 2012 English 2012 In this paper, we propose a method to identify good quality Wikipedia articles by mutually evaluating editors and texts. A major approach for assessing article quality is a text survival ratio based approach. In this approach, when a text survives beyond multiple edits, the text is assessed as good quality. This approach assumes that poor quality texts are deleted by editors with high possibility. However, many vandals delete good quality texts frequently, then the survival ratios of good quality texts are improperly decreased by vandals. As a result, many good quality texts are unfairly assessed as poor quality. In our method, we consider editor quality for calculating text quality, and decrease the impacts on text qualities by the vandals who has low quality. Using this improvement, the accuracy of the text quality should be improved. However, an inherent problem of this idea is that the editor qualities are calculated by the text qualities. To solve this problem, we mutually calculate the editor and text qualities until they converge. We did our experimental evaluation, and we confirmed that the proposed method could accurately assess the text qualities. 0 0
QualityRank: Assessing quality of wikipedia articles by mutually evaluating editors and texts Yu Suzuki
Masatoshi Yoshikawa
HT'12 - Proceedings of 23rd ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media English 2012 In this paper, we propose a method to identify high-quality Wikipedia articles by mutually evaluating editors and texts. A major approach for assessing articles using edit history is a text survival ratio based approach. However, the problem is that many high-quality articles are identified as low quality, because many vandals delete high-quality texts, then the survival ratios of high-quality texts are decreased by vandals. Our approach's strongest point is its resistance to vandalism. Using our method, if we calculate text quality values using editor quality values, vandals do not affect any quality values of the other editors, then the accuracy of text quality values should improve. However, the problem is that editor quality values are calculated by text quality values, and text quality values are calculated by editor quality values. To solve this problem, we mutually calculate editor and text quality values until they converge. Using this method, we can calculate a quality value of a text that takes into consideration that of its editors. From experimental evaluation, we confirmed that the proposed method can improve the accuracy of quality values for articles. Copyright 2012 ACM. 0 0