Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Algorithm Rates Trustworthiness of Wikipedia Pages

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the getting-it-right dept.

paleshadows writes "Researchers at UCSC developed a tool that measures the trustworthiness of each Wikipedia page. Roughly speaking, the algorithm analyzes the entire 7-year user-editing-history and utilizes the longevity of the content to learn which contributors are the most reliable: If your contribution lasts, you gain 'reputation,' whereas if it's edited out, your reputation falls. The trustworthiness of a newly inserted text is a function of the reputation of all its authors, a heuristic that turned out to be successful in identifying poor content. The interested reader can take a look at this demonstration (random page with white/orange background marking trusted/untrusted text, respectively; note "random page" link at the left for more demo pages), this presentation (pdf), and this paper (pdf)."

10 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. Light Bulb Moment by dsginter · · Score: 5, Funny

    Someone should make a wikipedia entry for this algorithm to see how trustworthy it is.

    --
    More
  2. Hmmm... A reputation metric... by Colin+Smith · · Score: 3, Funny

    It'd be nice if it could be generalised to other sites...

    --
    Deleted
  3. Seems to work ... by Purity+Of+Essence · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seems to work, the entire page turned orange.

    --
    +0 Meh
  4. hmmm... by PJ1216 · · Score: 5, Funny

    They should just call it wiki-karma.

  5. A reasonable first step... by dbolger · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...but call me when there's a tool to measure the truthiness of an article.

  6. Goddamn... by gowen · · Score: 5, Funny

    How did they pass up the chance to name this algorithm "Truthiness"?

    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
  7. Re:This will promote one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I agree!

  8. Maybe in the future by Unique2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    What we really need is some sort of algorithm that compares new information to that which is already stored. It then could test hypotheses to gain further understanding. Unfortunately a machine with enough processing power to run this "critical thinking and understanding" algorithm would be impossible to build with today's technology. We would need a new type of processor that has maybe billions of "organic neurons", it would need to be equipped with highly sophisticated sensors, a method of self transportation, self-healing and even it's own energy production system which could harvest energy indirectly from the Sun. We can only dream of such technology being available to everyone.

    --
    No trees were harmed in the posting of this message. However, a great number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
  9. Re:If by Tribbin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Whereas the implementation of "+1 funny" will be the end of the information age.

    --
    If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
  10. Re:Unpopular but neutral points of view? by gplus · · Score: 2, Funny

    And by far not all information that isn't backed up by source links right now is worthless or wrong. I want that sentence taken outside and shot. :)