Assessing quality score of wikipedia articles using mutual evaluation of editors and texts
| Assessing quality score of wikipedia articles using mutual evaluation of editors and texts | |
| Author(s) | Suzuki Y., Yoshikawa M. |
| Editor(s) | Unknown [+] |
| Published in | International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings |
| Date | 2013 |
| Issue | Unknown [+] |
| Page(s) | 1727–1732 |
| Keyword(s) | Edit history, Peer review, Quality, Vandalism, Wikipedia (Extra: Article qualities, Experimental evaluation, High probability, Mutual evaluations, Peer review, Vandalism, Wikipedia, Wikipedia articles, Image quality, Knowledge management, Quality control, Social networking (online)) |
| Peer-reviewed? | Unknown [+] |
| Language(s) | English |
| License(s) | Unknown [+] |
| Identifiers | |
| ISBN | 9781450322638 |
| DOI | 10.1145/2505515.2505610 |
| OCLC Number | Unknown [+] |
| CiteULike | Unknown [+] |
| arXiv | Unknown [+] |
| PubMed | Unknown [+] |
| Related material | |
| Concept(s) | Unknown [+] |
| Tool(s) | Unknown [+] |
| Dataset(s) | Unknown [+] |
| Slides | Not available [+] |
| Presentation | Not available [+] |
| Search | |
| Article | BASE, CiteSeerX, Google Scholar |
| Web | Ask, Bing, Google (PDF), Yahoo! |
| Download and mirrors | |
| Local copy | Not available [+] |
| Remote mirror(s) | Not available [+] |
| Archive(s) | Not available [+] |
| Paywall(s) | Not available [+] |
| Export and share | |
| BibTeX, CSV, RDF, JSON | |
      
| |
| Browse properties · List of conference papers | |
Assessing quality score of wikipedia articles using mutual evaluation of editors and texts is a 2013 conference paper written in English by Suzuki Y., Yoshikawa M. and published in International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings.
[edit] Abstract
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).
[edit] References
- This section requires expansion. Please, help!
Cited by
Probably, this publication is cited by others, but there are no articles available for them in WikiPapers.
