Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Social graph

The is a model representing social relations between entities, where nodes denote individuals, groups, or organizations and edges signify interpersonal such as friendships, follows, or interactions. This , drawn from foundational in applied to , captures the of relationships in both offline and contexts. Popularized by CEO in , the "social graph" initially described the platform's internal of relationships, which was later opened to third-party developers via to enable personalized applications across the . This underpinned features like friend recommendations, feeds, and by leveraging algorithms such as shortest-path computations and detection to infer and predict . Beyond , the social graph has influenced recommendation systems in platforms like and , facilitating scalable of vast through metrics like and clustering coefficients. While enabling unprecedented and -driven insights, the social graph has sparked controversies over and , as expansive enables surveillance-like applications and vulnerabilities to breaches, exemplified by the 2018 Cambridge incident where relational was harvested for political targeting . Empirical studies highlight how dense social graphs amplify cascades but also , underscoring causal between and behavioral outcomes in ecosystems.

Definition and Conceptual Foundations

Core Definition

A social graph is a mathematical model derived from graph theory that depicts social networks as consisting of nodes representing entities—such as individuals, organizations, or groups—and edges representing the relationships or interactions between those entities, such as friendships, follows, or collaborations. This structure captures the topology of connections within a population, enabling quantitative analysis of properties like centrality, clustering, and path lengths between nodes. The formalizes real-world structures by abstracting into a directed or undirected , where weights may quantify strength or , as seen in datasets from platforms tracking behaviors like messaging or endorsements. In computational terms, graphs facilitate algorithms for tasks such as detection or , grounded in the that correlates with rather than isolated attributes. The term "social graph" gained prominence in 2007 when Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg described it as the underlying network of user connections powering platform features and third-party applications, emphasizing its role in distributing content through interpersonal links. This usage highlighted the graph's scalability to billions of nodes, though empirical studies confirm that real social graphs exhibit small-world properties, with average path lengths around 4-6 in large-scale networks like early Facebook data.

Historical Origins and Evolution

![Sociogram representing social network analysis][float-right]
The application of to social relationships originated in early 20th-century , building on mathematical laid by Leonhard Euler's 1736 to the Seven Bridges of problem, which formalized the of as nodes and edges. Sociologist Georg Simmel's 1908 of dyads and triads provided conceptual by examining how structures emerge from , influencing later thinking.
Jacob L. Moreno advanced this in 1934 with , introducing sociograms—visual diagrams individuals as nodes and their relations as directed edges based on empirical choices, such as preferences in group settings. These tools quantified , revealing isolates, cliques, and , and were applied in clinical and educational contexts to diagnose group structures. By the mid-20th century, anthropologists like and sociologists like extended these methods, incorporating concepts like weak ties in 1973 to explain information and opportunity structures. The specific "social " appeared in contexts by the late but gained prominence in through Facebook's 2007 F8 , where CEO described it as a of stored digitally for scalable querying and . This marked a shift from manual, small-scale sociograms to vast, algorithmically processed ; by , Facebook's graph encompassed over 1 billion users and trillions of edges, enabling features like friend recommendations via metrics such as common neighbors. Evolution continued with decentralized protocols and semantic extensions, but the core digital social graph retained graph-theoretic principles for modeling persistent relations amid transient interactions.

Technical Foundations

Graph Theory Basics

In graph theory, a graph G = (V, E) is formally defined as a pair consisting of a set V of vertices, also known as nodes, and a set E of edges, which represent connections between pairs of vertices. Vertices typically model discrete entities, such as individuals in a social network, while edges capture pairwise relationships, like friendships or communications. This structure abstracts relational data without regard to geometric embedding, focusing solely on incidence relations between elements. Graphs are classified as undirected or directed based on edge symmetry. In an undirected graph, edges form unordered pairs \{u, v\}, implying bidirectional relations, as in mutual acquaintances where the connection lacks inherent direction. Directed graphs, or digraphs, use ordered pairs (u, v), suitable for asymmetric ties like follower relationships in social platforms, where g_{ij} \neq g_{ji}. Simple graphs prohibit self-loops (edges from a vertex to itself) and multiple edges between the same pair, though multigraphs and weighted variants extend these for richer modeling, assigning numerical values to edges to quantify interaction strength. Fundamental properties include the degree of a vertex, defined as the number of edges incident to it—in undirected graphs, this counts neighbors directly; in directed graphs, in-degree and out-degree distinguish incoming and outgoing ties. A path is a sequence of distinct vertices connected by consecutive edges, enabling measures of reachability; a graph is connected if a path exists between every pair of vertices, otherwise comprising disconnected components. Cycles, closed paths returning to the starting vertex, underpin analyses of redundancy and structure, while adjacency—whether vertices share an edge—forms the basis for matrix representations like the adjacency matrix, where entry a_{ij} = 1 if an edge exists from i to j, facilitating computational traversal and analysis. These elements provide the foundational toolkit for modeling social graphs, where vertices represent users and edges denote interactions.

Modeling Relationships and Properties

In social graph modeling, entities such as individuals, organizations, or content items are represented as nodes (or ), while the connections between them—such as friendships, follows, collaborations, or endorsements—are modeled as edges (or ). This draws from , where a G = (V, E) consists of a set V and an edge set E, enabling the quantification of relational patterns like connectivity and influence. Edges in social graphs can be undirected, indicating symmetric relationships where the connection is mutual and bidirectional, as in traditional friendships where if A knows B, then B knows A. In contrast, directed edges (or ) capture asymmetric ties, such as one-way follows on platforms like Twitter, where the direction from source to target matters and reciprocity is not assumed. Directed graphs are particularly suited to modeling influence flows or citations, whereas undirected graphs simplify analysis of cohesive groups but may overlook directional asymmetries in real-world interactions. Properties and attributes enhance the expressiveness of these models by attaching to and . might include demographic like , , or , allowing for segmentation in analyses such as detection. can specify attributes like strength (via weights, e.g., of ), timestamps of formation, or types (e.g., familial ), which weighted algorithms for robustness. In labeled models, both and carry labels for , facilitating queries over multifaceted relationships, though this increases compared to . Advanced modeling accommodates beyond graphs, such as multigraphs that permit multiple edges between the same pair to represent diverse types (e.g., colleague and friend simultaneously). Hypergraphs extend this by allowing edges to connect multiple nodes, capturing group interactions like authorship or shared that pairwise edges cannot fully represent. These extensions preserve causal insights into , such as how weights correlate with , but require careful validation against empirical to avoid overparameterization.

Key Implementations in Centralized Platforms

Facebook's Social Graph

Facebook's social constitutes a structure modeling its users as nodes and interpersonal —primarily friendships, but extending to follows, , and other associations—as edges, enabling the platform's functionality of surfacing relevant and recommendations. introduced the publicly on , , at the inaugural f8 , framing the social graph as the underlying of relationships that developers could via the newly launched to build interconnected applications. This conceptualization positioned the graph not merely as but as a foundational layer for interoperability, allowing apps to query and incorporate users' social contexts without rebuilding relational mappings from scratch. Early implementations relied on a MySQL-based augmented by memcache for caching frequent reads, treating the graph as a "lookaside" where edge data was fetched during PHP queries. As user growth accelerated—reaching 50 million active users by 2008—the proved inadequate for the graph's dynamism, prompting shifts toward specialized graph stores. In 2013, Facebook introduced TAO (The Associations and Objects), a distributed datastore tailored for social graph workloads, which separates storage into persistent MySQL shards for objects (nodes like users or pages) and associations (typed s with metadata such as timestamps or visibility settings). TAO employs a multi-tier caching strategy—leader-follower replicas in memcache for hot , backed by durable storage—to achieve sub-millisecond latencies on reads while ensuring atomic writes via leader election and versioning, thus accommodating the graph's high-velocity updates from billions of daily interactions. The graph's edges are typed and directed, supporting operations like traversal for friend-of-friend suggestions or aggregation for Feed ranking, with exposing subsets via the Graph API for external access under user permissions. This structure scaled to handle workloads exceeding 10 billion queries per second by the early 2020s, leveraging sharding by node ID and geographic to manage partition tolerance. Evolving from unidirectional friendships to multifaceted associations—including likes, shares, and event RSVPs—the social graph has underpinned revenue-generating features like social , launched November 6, 2007, which targets users via inferred interests derived from edge traversals. Despite its efficacy in personalization, the centralized control has drawn scrutiny for enabling unchecked data aggregation, though empirical analyses confirm its causal role in user retention through network effects rather than mere convenience.

Twitter's Follow Graph

Twitter's follow graph is a directed graph in which nodes represent users and edges denote unidirectional "follow" relationships, with an edge from user A to user B indicating that A follows B and thereby receives B's posts in their timeline. This model prioritizes asymmetric information flow, enabling one-way content consumption without requiring mutual approval, which distinguishes it from bidirectional friendship graphs on platforms like Facebook. The graph's structure exhibits power-law degree distributions, with a small number of high-degree nodes (celebrities or influencers) attracting disproportionate followers, while most users have few outgoing edges. To manage the graph's —historically encompassing of millions of nodes and billions of edges by the early —Twitter developed FlockDB, a distributed, fault-tolerant optimized for storing and querying adjacency rather than full traversals. Introduced on , , FlockDB supports efficient operations like followers or checking mutual follows but avoids path-finding to maintain at high volumes, such as billions of edges. It integrates with MySQL for storage and uses a web service interface for reads and writes, facilitating fan-out mechanisms where a user's tweet is pushed to followers' timelines in real-time. The follow underpins features, including via writes and personalized recommendations through the "Who to Follow" () , which leverages -based to suggest . For instance, employs over the 's , analyzing paths and similarities in follow patterns to predict relevant follows, with models trained on historical to candidates by predicted . Later enhancements, such as RealGraph introduced around , refine these predictions by user-tweet interactions into denser representations for scoring. Despite its , the 's directed contributes to low reciprocity—typically 22-30% of follows are mutual—reflecting its more as an or than a purely social one.

Implementations in Other Platforms

LinkedIn employs a distributed named to model professional relationships as a social graph, handling tens of terabytes of and supporting up to half a million for features like connection recommendations and analysis. This implementation emphasizes directed edges representing endorsements, follows, and collaborations, differing from consumer platforms by prioritizing economic and career-oriented ties over casual friendships. Google+ utilized a directed graph structured around "circles," allowing users to categorize into asymmetric groups for selective , which facilitated ego-centric in datasets comprising millions of edges from public circle exports. Launched in , this aimed to integrate across Google's but faced challenges in , leading to its discontinuation in ; empirical studies of its graph revealed denser clusters among celebrities and IT professionals compared to broader populations. Other platforms, such as , integrate social graph inherited from Meta's infrastructure to infer relationships via mutual follows and interactions, powering feed algorithms that prioritize content from strong ties, though increasingly augmented by interest-based signals. In contrast, largely eschews a traditional connection-focused social graph in favor of an interest graph, recommending videos based on user engagement patterns rather than explicit follower links, which enabled rapid scaling to over 1 billion users by 2021 without relying on imported social networks.

Extensions and Advanced Protocols

Open Graph Protocol

The Open Graph Protocol (OGP), introduced by Facebook on April 21, 2010, is a framework of standardized meta tags embedded in HTML documents to describe the properties of web pages, enabling them to function as rich objects within social networks. It allows platforms to generate preview cards with titles, descriptions, images, and other media when links are shared, thereby integrating external web content into the social graph by associating it with user interactions such as likes, shares, and comments. This protocol extends the social graph beyond platform-specific data by mapping web resources to graph entities, facilitating richer connections between users, content, and external sites. Technically, OGP employs namespace-prefixed meta elements in the <head> section of HTML, such as og:title for the page's title, og:image for a representative image (recommended at least 200x200 pixels), og:description for a brief summary, and og:type to specify object types like "website," "article," or "video.other" from a predefined set. Additional properties support advanced features, including audio (og:audio), video (og:video), and determiners for locale (og:locale), with the protocol drawing inspiration from established standards like Dublin Core, RDFa, and Microformats to ensure semantic interoperability. When a link is shared, social platforms parse these tags via web crawlers to construct interactive previews, which users can then engage with, effectively incorporating third-party content into the graph's relational structure without requiring direct API integration. In the context of social graphs, OGP's primary impact has been to democratize content representation across networks, with adoption extending to platforms like (now ), , and , though implementations vary— favors its own cards protocol alongside OGP for compatibility. By , Facebook's rollout coincided with the "Like" button's launch, enabling over million websites to integrate within months, amplifying graph density through viral sharing mechanics. However, reliance on self-declared metadata introduces risks of manipulation, as sites can alter tags without verification, potentially disseminating misleading previews that propagate through the graph. Despite these vulnerabilities, OGP remains a foundational extension for scalable, web-wide social connectivity, powering billions of daily shares while underscoring the tension between openness and control in graph architectures.

Semantic and Interest Graphs

Semantic graphs extend traditional social graphs by incorporating structured semantic relations, often using Resource Description Framework (RDF) triples or ontologies to represent not just connections between users but also the meaning, context, and inferable properties of those relationships. In this model, nodes may denote users, content, or concepts, while edges encode predicates like "shares interest in" or "authored," enabling machine-readable inferences such as transitive relationships or entity disambiguation. This approach draws from semantic web principles, allowing social data to integrate with broader knowledge graphs for enhanced queryability and analysis, as explored in efforts to evolve social network analysis into knowledge graph frameworks. In practice, semantic graphs address limitations of raw social graphs by adding layers of explicit semantics, facilitating applications like personalized recommendation systems that infer user preferences from relational ontologies rather than solely from direct links. For instance, semantic leverages these structures to merge user interactions with domain-specific , improving metrics like community detection through weighted, context-aware edges. Empirical studies demonstrate that such embeddings preserve textual semantics in graph representations, yielding up to 10-15% improvements in downstream tasks like over purely topological models. However, implementation requires robust triple stores for , as seen in platforms like , where predicates define across heterogeneous sources. Interest graphs, in contrast, model connections based on shared topics, hobbies, or behavioral signals rather than , forming a complementary extension to social graphs by prioritizing affinity over relational proximity. Originating as a conceptual around 2010, graphs aggregate engagements—such as , follows on hashtags, or search histories—to create dynamic edges linking individuals to thematic clusters, serendipitous beyond one's immediate . Platforms like TikTok exemplify this through their For You Page algorithm, launched in 2018, which uses interest-based signals to curate feeds, achieving 150% higher engagement rates compared to social-graph-dominant models by surfacing content from non-followed creators aligned with inferred preferences. The integration of interest graphs into social platforms has accelerated since the mid-2010s, driven by algorithmic shifts toward predictive personalization; for example, Instagram's Reels and Twitter's (now X) topic follows operationalize interest edges to expand reach, with data showing interest-driven feeds outperforming friend-centric ones in retention metrics by focusing on explicit and implicit signals like dwell time on content. This extension mitigates echo chambers in pure social graphs by introducing cross-community links via topical similarity, though it raises concerns over opaque inference accuracy, as platforms derive interests from aggregated behaviors without user-verified ontologies. When combined with semantic elements, interest graphs evolve into hybrid structures, such as those embedding topical similarity measures for resource recommendation, enhancing precision in heterogeneous networks.

Data Management and Computational Aspects

Storage and Scalability Challenges

Storing large-scale social graphs presents formidable challenges due to their immense , with platforms like managing graphs comprising over billion nodes and up to edges recent analyses. These structures generate petabytes of , characterized by high sparsity—where edges represent among users—and irregular patterns favoring traversals over scans, rendering traditional adjacency matrices inefficient in both and query . To mitigate storage demands, systems employ distributed architectures with denormalized representations, such as , which separates objects (nodes) and associations (edges) into sharded tables for persistence while leveraging in-memory caches with LRU eviction for frequently accessed "hot" , enabling efficient single-hop traversals critical for social feeds and recommendations. handles many petabytes across logical , embedding IDs to facilitate locality, but contends with high-degree vertices—like celebrities with millions of followers—that skew storage and amplify cross-shard dependencies if partitioning is imbalanced. Scalability intensifies these issues through , with graphs enduring billions of reads and millions of writes per second from interactions, compounded by geographic requiring low-latency replication across centers. TAO achieves this via read-optimized (99.8% reads), leader-follower tiers, and cloning for hotspots, yielding 96.4% rates and read latencies of 1-3 on , though misses can extend to 75 and replication lags occasionally exceed 10 seconds for 0.2% of operations. Broader challenges include partitioning to minimize cuts—potentially disrupting traversals—and accommodating dynamic updates without full recomputation, often necessitating to prioritize over strict transactions in high-throughput environments. Emerging solutions explore storage like LSM-trees combined with compressed sparse row formats for write-heavy dynamic graphs, but persistent hurdles remain in balancing for analytics on billion-scale datasets against real-time , where and —encompassing diverse types like friendships, , and follows—exacerbate load imbalances and query during traversals such as friend-of-friend computations.

Analysis Techniques and Algorithms

Centrality measures quantify the structural of nodes within social graphs, identifying key influencers or brokers in . Degree centrality counts the number of direct a node has, serving as a indicator of local popularity, as demonstrated in analyses of collaboration where high-degree nodes correlate with prolific contributors. Betweenness centrality assesses a node's control over information flow by calculating the proportion of shortest paths passing through it, proven effective for detecting bottlenecks in communication graphs with computational complexity O(n m) for sparse using Brandes' algorithm. Closeness centrality measures average shortest path distance to all other nodes, highlighting efficient communicators, while eigenvector centrality weights by the centrality of neighbors, capturing global influence as in Google's PageRank adaptation for social influence scoring. These metrics, rooted in , enable empirical assessment of power dynamics, with studies showing betweenness outperforming degree in predicting leadership in organizational . Community detection algorithms partition social graphs into densely connected subgroups, revealing emergent social structures. The Louvain method optimizes modularity—a measure of intra-community edge density versus random expectation—through hierarchical agglomeration, achieving scalability on million-node graphs like Facebook's friendship network with resolutions up to 1,000 communities in seconds. Girvan-Newman employs edge-betweenness to iteratively remove bridges, excelling in small-world topologies but scaling poorly at O(n^3) due to repeated centrality computations. Spectral clustering leverages eigenvectors of the Laplacian matrix for partitioning, effective for stochastic block models underlying social data, with normalized cuts minimizing disconnection costs. Infomap uses information theory to minimize the description length of random walks, outperforming modularity-based methods in benchmark tests on real-world networks like email exchanges. Empirical evaluations on datasets such as SNAP's social circles confirm Louvain's balance of accuracy and speed, though overlapping communities require extensions like clique percolation. Link prediction algorithms forecast potential edges in evolving social graphs, aiding friend recommendations and . Topology-based methods like neighbors score pairs by shared , assuming , while Adamic-Adar weights rare neighbors higher, improving in heterogeneous by up to 20% over scoring in citation graphs adaptable to social ties. posits new links favor high-degree nodes, mirroring scale-free observed in co-authorship since Barabási–Albert's 1999 model. factorization decomposes adjacency matrices into latent factors, with Netflix Prize techniques extended to social data yielding AUC scores above 0.9 in sparse regimes. Graph neural networks (GNNs) advance analysis by learning node embeddings that encode structural and semantic features for downstream tasks. GraphSAGE aggregates neighbor features via sampling and aggregation functions, enabling inductive learning on unseen nodes, as applied to Pinterest's user-item graphs for recommendation with 15% lift in engagement. Node2Vec employs biased random walks to generate sequences for Skip-Gram training, balancing local and global views to outperform DeepWalk in link prediction on BlogCatalog by 10-15% AUC. GNN variants like Graph Attention Networks weigh neighbor contributions dynamically, enhancing anomaly detection in financial transaction graphs akin to fraud in social lending platforms. These methods, trained on labeled subsets, reveal causal pathways in influence propagation, with causal GNNs incorporating interventions to disentangle correlation from causation in viral spread models. Scalable implementations handle billion-edge graphs via distributed frameworks like GraphX, though overfitting risks necessitate rigorous validation against held-out dynamics.

Privacy, Security, and Ethical Issues

Privacy Risks and Data Exposure

Social graphs, which map interpersonal and interactions within platforms, inherently facilitate risks by enabling the aggregation and of relational that can reveal sensitive personal beyond explicitly shared content. For instance, in a social graph can indicate political affiliations, conditions, or through homophily—tendency for similar individuals to —allowing inferences even when direct disclosures are absent or protected. Empirical studies confirm that graph alone supports attribute attacks, where adversaries predict traits like or interests with accuracies exceeding 70% in controlled datasets by modeling patterns and neighborhoods. A key vector for data exposure involves platform APIs designed to access social graph elements, as exemplified by the 's role in the incident. In 2014–2015, the personality quiz app "thisisyourdigitallife" collected data from approximately 270,000 users who consented, but via API permissions, it harvested public profiles, likes, and social connections from their friends, ultimately affecting data from up to 87 million users worldwide. This exposure stemmed from lax consent mechanisms, where friends' data was accessed without their knowledge, enabling micro-targeted political advertising by for campaigns including the 2016 U.S. presidential election. 's subsequent audit revealed the data included identifiers, demographics, and inferred psychometrics derived from graph traversals, highlighting systemic vulnerabilities in friend-permission models that prioritized developer access over granular privacy controls. Further risks arise from shadow profiles, where platforms compile dossiers on non-users by cross-referencing uploaded contact lists, email hashes, and incidental mentions in posts or graphs. Facebook has amassed such profiles containing phone numbers, emails, and inferred connections for billions of individuals never registered on the service, as contacts shared by users inadvertently link non-members into the broader graph. This practice evades direct consent, exposing non-users to re-identification and targeted tracking; for example, hashed phone numbers from address books can match against graph data to build behavioral profiles for advertising, with limited opt-out options and no deletion guarantees. Regulatory scrutiny, including EU investigations, has noted that shadow profiling amplifies exposure risks during breaches, as leaked graph data can deanonymize outsiders via linkage to known users' networks. Data breaches compound these issues by dumping raw graph elements, such as friend lists and interaction histories, into public domains. In social engineering attacks, which accounted for 28% of 2025 breaches with confirmed disclosures, attackers exploit graph data to phish extended networks or mount inference-based extortion. Peer-reviewed analyses underscore that once exposed, social graph data resists anonymization due to unique structural signatures—like degree centrality or clustering coefficients—that enable node re-identification with over 90% precision in large networks. Platforms' reliance on centralized storage exacerbates this, as evidenced by recurring incidents where API misconfigurations or insider leaks have surfaced terabytes of relational data, underscoring the causal link between graph scale and exposure magnitude without robust differential privacy implementations.

Security Vulnerabilities and Responses

Social graphs, representing in platforms like Twitter's follow graph, are susceptible to Sybil attacks, where adversaries create numerous identities to manipulate , such as amplifying or evading bans. These attacks exploit the difficulty in verifying identities in large-scale, trust-based systems, potentially allowing a single to control disproportionate or recommendation outcomes. For instance, in overlays, Sybil nodes can form dense clusters mimicking legitimate subgraphs, undermining . Privacy inference attacks pose another core vulnerability, enabling adversaries to deduce sensitive user attributes or hidden links from partially observed graph data. Link prediction models, often powered by graph neural networks (GNNs), can infer private relationships with high accuracy, as demonstrated in studies where attackers reconstruct edges from embeddings, revealing associations like undisclosed friendships. Disparate impacts arise, with minority groups facing elevated risks; for example, structural signals in anonymized graphs can infer sexual orientation more readily for LGBT users due to homophily patterns. Membership inference attacks further exploit GNN outputs to determine if a user's data contributed to training sets, breaching anonymity in federated learning scenarios. Responses include trust-based defense protocols like SybilLimit, which accept edges from low-degree nodes preferentially to limit attacker infiltration, achieving near-optimal guarantees against random Sybil generation. Machine learning detectors analyze graph motifs or behavioral anomalies, such as rapid friend additions, to flag Sybil clusters with reported precision exceeding 90% in controlled evaluations. For inference attacks, adversarial training perturbs embeddings to minimize attribute leakage while preserving utility, as in methods that add noise calibrated to epsilon-differential privacy bounds. Graph anonymization techniques, including edge perturbation or degree-preserving randomization, mitigate link inference, though trade-offs in utility persist; empirical tests show up to 30% accuracy drops for attackers at minimal structural distortion. Platforms implement hybrid measures, combining these with identity verification (e.g., phone linking) and anomaly monitoring, reducing Sybil prevalence in networks like early Facebook implementations.

Ethical and Regulatory Debates

Control over proprietary social graphs by dominant platforms has prompted antitrust challenges, with regulators contending that exclusive access to users' connections and interactions creates insurmountable barriers to competition. In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission sued Meta (formerly Facebook) in December 2020, alleging the company unlawfully maintained monopoly power in personal social networking markets by acquiring Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014—acquisitions that neutralized threats—and by denying rivals access to its social graph APIs, thereby preventing interoperability. European regulators have similarly pursued cases; the European Commission fined Meta €1.06 billion in 2023 for violating the General Data Protection Regulation through unlawful data transfers, highlighting how social graph data fuels cross-border dominance. Critics of these actions, including legal scholars, argue that antitrust enforcement risks infringing First Amendment protections by compelling platforms to share expressive or relational data, potentially chilling innovation without proven consumer harm. Data portability mandates represent another regulatory flashpoint, aiming to erode social graph lock-in by requiring platforms to enable data transfers, yet sparking debates over feasibility and . The EU's GDPR, effective May 2018, users the right to receive , including social connections, in a structured for transfer to competitors, though implementation has been limited by technical challenges like dynamic graph updates and lack of standardized formats. In the U.S., Utah's , enacted in 2023 and amended in 2024, mandates real-time portability of social graphs and content from social media firms, positioning it as a tool to foster competition but drawing opposition for compelling disclosure of sensitive relational data without affirmative user consent for each connection. Proponents cite empirical evidence from limited pilots, such as Facebook's Download Your Information tool, showing portability boosts switching rates by up to 20% in experimental settings, while detractors warn of privacy erosion, as exporting graphs could expose non-consenting contacts to new platforms' risks. Ethically, debates center on the moral allocation of social graph ownership and the societal costs of centralized control, with first principles questioning whether users or platforms hold rightful claim to relational data generated through voluntary interactions. Platforms assert proprietary rights derived from network investments, as evidenced by Meta's 2018 policy restricting third-party graph access post-Cambridge Analytica, which harvested data from 87 million users without full consent in 2014-2015, underscoring risks of commodifying human ties for surveillance-driven revenue. Ethicists argue that monopoly over graphs enables unchecked power, such as algorithmic amplification of polarizing content—studies from 2018-2020 linked Facebook's graph-based feeds to increased polarization in 56 countries—yet attribute this less to inherent structure than to profit-maximizing incentives absent competition. Counterarguments emphasize causal realism: decentralized alternatives like Mastodon, with 10 million users by 2023, demonstrate graphs can thrive without monopoly harms, but adoption lags due to network effects, raising ethical questions about subsidizing portability at the expense of platform autonomy. Overall, these tensions reflect unresolved trade-offs between innovation from scale and harms from concentration, with empirical antitrust outcomes pending trials as of 2025.

Societal and Economic Impacts

Achievements in and

Social graphs have enabled unprecedented scale in human by modeling relationships as traversable data structures, allowing platforms to connect billions of individuals across geographic divides. Facebook's social graph, introduced in , underpins a serving 3.07 billion monthly as of Q4 , equating to roughly % of the and facilitating trillions of daily interactions such as messaging, , and group formations. This supports communication that sustains relationships, , and , with from metrics showing reduced effective distances in interactions via shortest-path algorithms. Innovations in graph-based technologies have leveraged social graphs to develop advanced recommendation systems and personalization engines, enhancing user experiences through precise matching of content and connections. For example, graph algorithms power "people you may know" features by analyzing mutual connections and interaction patterns, which studies attribute to increased platform stickiness and viral growth. The exposure of social graph data via APIs has further catalyzed third-party innovations, such as social plugins on external sites that integrate login, sharing, and endorsement functionalities, expanding the web's social layer and enabling hybrid applications like social commerce interfaces. Economically, social graphs have driven through effects that amplify , job matching, and , with quantifying contributions to gains via faster knowledge . Platforms monetize these graphs primarily through , generating over $130 billion in for in by utilizing relational for . Additionally, graph-enabled have supported tools for and , fostering innovations in sectors like and dependent on relational .

Criticisms and Empirical Assessments of Harms

Critics argue that social graphs, by and leveraging interpersonal , exacerbate societal polarization through mechanisms like homophily—where users predominantly with ideologically similar individuals—and algorithmic of along these edges, fostering chambers that reinforce biases and to diverse . Empirical assessments, however, mixed results; a 2020 experiment deactivating accounts for U.S. users during an found no significant in or affective divides, suggesting that while graphs may facilitate polarized interactions, they do not solely them. Similarly, a 2024 analysis of 's algorithm changes aimed at reducing divisive showed minimal impact on overall polarization metrics, with critics questioning the study's failure to adequately account for misinformation persistence in network structures. The structure of social graphs enables rapid diffusion of misinformation, as dense clusters and high-degree nodes (influencers) act as super-spreaders, with theoretical models demonstrating how fake news propagates faster in modular networks compared to accurate information due to novelty bias and emotional contagion along ties. Causal evidence from field experiments supports this: during the 2020 U.S. election, exposure to fact-checks via social ties reduced belief in false claims by 0.07 standard deviations, but untreated network effects sustained misinformation in echo chambers. A systematic review of 52 studies links social media disinformation, amplified by graph-based sharing, to heightened polarization, though many findings are correlational and confounded by user self-selection into homogeneous groups. Social graphs contribute to mental health harms by enabling social comparison, cyberbullying within cliques, and addictive engagement loops that exploit relational data for personalized feeds, correlating with increased depressive symptoms and anxiety. Longitudinal data from over 12,000 U.S. adolescents tracked from 2018–2021 shows that each additional hour of daily social media use predicts a 13% rise in depressive episodes over two years, mediated by disrupted sleep and interpersonal stress amplified through networked interactions. Meta-analyses of 83 studies confirm problematic social media use—often graph-driven via notifications from connections—positively associates with depression (r=0.25), anxiety (r=0.22), and stress, with experimental reductions in platform access yielding small but significant improvements in well-being. However, causation remains debated, as twin studies indicate genetic predispositions to both heavy use and mental distress explain up to 50% of the variance, rather than graphs unilaterally causing harm. Addiction-like behaviors emerge from graph-optimized algorithms prioritizing high-engagement content from ties, leading to compulsive checking; surveys of 1,787 young adults found problematic use predicts compromised , with density correlating to FOMO () and subsequent distress. Empirical interventions, such as limits reducing by 20%, decreased addiction scores by 15–20% in randomized trials, underscoring how relational data fuels habitual loops. Critics, including executives, contend these designs intentionally exploit responses tied to social validation within graphs, though regulatory like the U.S. General's 2023 advisory emphasizes correlational risks over proven for . Overall, while graphs undeniably harms through , rigorous assessments reveal effects moderated by traits and policies, with no consensus on societal detriment.

Future Developments

Decentralized and Web3 Social Graphs

Decentralized social graphs in utilize infrastructure to represent user connections, identities, and interactions in a manner that individuals and portability of their , contrasting with the centralized silos of Web2 platforms where like proprietary graphs. These graphs employ cryptographic primitives such as wallet addresses, decentralized identifiers (DIDs), and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) to encode relationships on-chain, across applications without reliance on a single intermediary. This structure aims to mitigate risks of data monopolization and censorship by distributing via consensus mechanisms, though implementation often involves layer-2 scaling solutions to address blockchain's inherent throughput limitations. Pioneering efforts in Web3 social graphs emerged around 2016 with platforms like Steemit, which integrated blockchain rewards for content creation and curation, establishing early models of token-incentivized networks. Subsequent advancements include the Lens Protocol, introduced in February 2022 by the team behind Aave on the Polygon blockchain, which functions as a permissionless social graph where user profiles are NFTs, follows are on-chain actions, and content is modular for developer composability. Similarly, Farcaster, launched in 2020 by former Coinbase engineers Dan Romero and Varun Srinivasan, operates as an Ethereum-based protocol supporting multiple client applications, with user data stored off-chain in "hubs" for efficiency while anchoring identity and key actions to the blockchain for verifiability. By October 2024, Farcaster had attracted over 500,000 active users, driven partly by integrations like frame-based mini-apps that embed interactive experiences directly in feeds. Proponents argue that Web3 social graphs foster causal resilience against platform failures or policy shifts, as users retain sovereign control over their connections—evidenced by features like cross-app profile migration in Lens, where a single NFT profile can underpin experiences in disparate decentralized applications (dApps). Empirical benefits include enhanced data portability, reducing lock-in effects observed in Web2, where switching platforms erases social capital; for instance, Lens enables shared network effects across 100+ integrated apps by mid-2024. However, these systems have not displaced centralized incumbents, with adoption constrained by network effects: Web2 platforms command billions of users, while leading Web3 protocols like Farcaster report daily actives in the low hundreds of thousands as of late 2024. Key challenges include scalability bottlenecks, where on-chain transactions incur fees averaging $0.01–$0.10 on but higher on base layers, exacerbating for real-time interactions compared to Web2's sub-second responses. User experience hurdles, such as and gas fees, deter non-technical audiences, with surveys indicating that over 70% of potential users cite as a barrier to entry in social tools. poses structural dilemmas, as precludes centralized takedowns, leading to persistent illicit material risks without effective on-chain ; protocols like rely on voluntary hub operators for filtering, but this introduces partial centralization vulnerabilities. Despite these, ongoing developments, such as 's $DEGEN tips distributing over $10 million in rewards by 2024, demonstrate viable economic models for incentivizing participation, though long-term sustainability depends on resolving interoperability standards amid fragmented ecosystems.

Integration with AI and Emerging Technologies

Graph neural networks (GNNs) represent a primary for integrating with graphs, the of relational through iterative between s to capture dependencies and embeddings. Developed as an extension of convolutional neural networks for non-Euclidean , GNNs facilitate tasks such as , , and in contexts, where users form s and denote relationships like friendships or follows. This approach outperforms traditional on -structured by explicitly modeling neighborhood influences, with variants like GraphSAGE and GAT achieving state-of-the-art results in benchmarks as of 2021. In recommendation systems, GNNs fuse graphs with user-item interactions to enhance ; for example, models aggregating signals from user-user social ties alongside improve prediction accuracy by 5-10% over baselines in datasets like and Epinions, as demonstrated in 2019 frameworks. Similarly, GNNs in by identifying outliers in embedding spaces, aiding fraud detection where relational patterns reveal coordinated behaviors, with applications processing millions of nodes in real-time via scalable implementations. Beyond core analysis, AI integration extends to predictive modeling in social network analysis, where GNNs forecast information diffusion or community evolution; studies from 2023 show these models reducing error rates in virality prediction by leveraging temporal graph snapshots. Emerging applications include AI agents constructing dynamic social graphs for multi-agent coordination, as surveyed in 2025 works on graph-empowered agents, enabling autonomous decision-making in simulated societies. Integration with large language models further augments this by injecting graph-derived relational context into prompts, improving tasks like entity resolution across networks, though scalability remains constrained by computational demands on billion-scale graphs. For broader emerging technologies, social graphs inform AI-driven spatial computing in virtual environments, where GNNs model user interactions in metaverses to predict engagement; prototypes as of use graph embeddings to simulate social dynamics in VR platforms, enhancing immersion without direct hardware citations. However, challenges persist in handling heterogeneous data from IoT-linked social feeds, where federated GNN variants preserve privacy during training across distributed nodes. These advancements underscore AI's role in evolving social graphs from static maps to adaptive, predictive structures, contingent on robust edge representations to mitigate biases in sparse connections.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] Chapter 10 - Mining Social-Network Graphs - Stanford InfoLab
    Social networks are naturally modeled as graphs, which we sometimes refer to as a social graph. The entities are the nodes, and an edge connects two nodes if ...
  2. [2]
    [PDF] Graph theory and its role in social network analysis
    Social Graph. Community- rich. Undirected. Unweighted. ~1,000,000 Video sharing ... Despite its strengths, applying graph theory to social network analysis faces ...
  3. [3]
    Social graph-iti - The Economist
    Oct 18, 2007 · Mr Zuckerberg compares his graphing of human connections to the work of Renaissance mapmakers. ... “The value of a social network is defined not ...Missing: origin | Show results with:origin
  4. [4]
    Social Network Graphs: Concepts, Metrics & Tools - PuppyGraph
    Rating 100% (2) · FreeJun 2, 2025 · A social network graph represents entities such as users, posts, or comments as nodes, and the relationships between them, such as follows, replies, or likes, ...
  5. [5]
    Facebook's Graph Search tool causes increasing privacy concerns
    Jan 23, 2013 · New blog aims to show how those who share photos, personal information and 'likes' on Facebook could see privacy invaded.
  6. [6]
    History of the Cambridge Analytica Controversy
    Mar 16, 2023 · The Cambridge Analytica controversy profoundly impacted the world of data privacy, political campaigning, and social media. Governments ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  7. [7]
    The Rise of Social Graphs for Businesses - Harvard Business Review
    third parties — this “social graph” makes it possible to make personalized recommendations to you, and everyone else. For example, ...Missing: theory | Show results with:theory
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Lectures 2: Graph Theory and Social Networks
    First part of the course focuses on the physical structure of networks, with no or very simple models of behavior. Basic tool: graph theory, the mathematical ...
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Graph Theory and Social Networks
    Bridges are presumably extremely rare in real social networks! Definition: a local bridge in a graph is an edge whose endpoints have no common neighbor.
  10. [10]
  11. [11]
    Facebook Unveils Platform for Developers of Social Applications
    May 24, 2007 · Mass Distribution through the Social GraphApplications will gain distribution through what Zuckerberg called the “social graph,” the network ...Missing: origin | Show results with:origin
  12. [12]
    [PDF] Graph Theory and Social Networks - part I - HAL @ USC
    While the nature of the nodes and the links differs wide- ly, each network has the same graph representation, consisting of N = 4 nodes and L = 4 links, shown ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  13. [13]
    Social Network Analysis 101: Ultimate Guide
    Sep 14, 2023 · The concept of SNA emerged in the 1930s within the field of sociology. Its roots, however, trace back to graph theory in mathematics. It was ...
  14. [14]
    Uncover the Fascinating History of Social Network Analysis (SNA)
    May 7, 2024 · SNA began with Simmel's work, formalizing with Moreno's sociometry in the 1930s, and advanced with Milgram's experiment and Granovetter's work. ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] Moreno's Sociometry: Exploring Interpersonal Connection
    May 15, 2020 · Sociometry is a set of methods created by J. L. Moreno (1934) to study the interpersonal connections of individuals and groups of all sizes.
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Visualizing Social Networks - Carnegie Mellon University
    Thus, in his early works, Moreno introduced five important ideas about the proper construction of images of social networks: (1) he drew graphs, (2) he drew ...
  17. [17]
    What Your Business Needs to Know About Social Graphs
    Jan 7, 2011 · The term social graph was first used a few years ago by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, specifically in reference to the Facebook platform. Your ...
  18. [18]
    [PDF] graph theory: basic definitions and theorems
    Definition 1. A graph G = (V,E) consists of a set V of vertices (also called nodes) and a set E of edges.
  19. [19]
    Basics of Graph Theory - Math (Princeton)
    A graph has vertices (dots) representing related objects, and edges (lines) connecting them. Simple graphs have no edges starting and ending at the same vertex ...
  20. [20]
    15.1 Introduction to Graph Theory
    In graph theory, a graph is a set of vertices (nodes) and edges (lines) connecting pairs of vertices. Only the connections are important.
  21. [21]
    [PDF] 1 Basic Definitions and Concepts in Graph Theory
    A graph G(V,E) is a set V of vertices and a set E of edges. In an undirected graph, an edge is an unordered pair of vertices. An ordered pair of vertices is ...
  22. [22]
    [PDF] 6.207/14.15: Networks Lecture 2: Graph Theory and Social Networks
    Sep 14, 2009 · We refer to a graph as a directed graph (or digraph) if gij 6= gji and an ... An undirected graph is connected if every two nodes in the network.
  23. [23]
    [PDF] 5 – Graph Theory Basics - William T. Trotter
    Nov 14, 2017 · Vertices are also called nodes, points, locations, stations, etc. 2. Edges are also called arcs, lines, links, pipes, connectors, etc.
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Introduction to graph theory
    A path from vertex a to vertex b is an ordered sequence a=v0, v1, …, vm=b of distinct vertices in which each adjacent pair (vj-1,vj) is linked by an edge.
  25. [25]
    [PDF] Graphs 1 Graph Definitions - DSpace@MIT
    Elements of V are called vertices. An element of E is called an edge. The basic property of an edge in a simple graph is that it adjoins two vertices. Formally,.
  26. [26]
    Social Networks | Brilliant Math & Science Wiki
    These graphs can be either undirected or directed. For instance, Facebook can be described with an undirected graph since the friendship is bidirectional, Alice ...
  27. [27]
    [PDF] z lecture 25: social network analysis - Brown CS
    map out the Web or Twitter. Page 15. Directed vs. Undirected Graphs. ○ Undirected graphs have only bidirectional links.
  28. [28]
    6 Types of Ties and Their Graphs - Social Networks
    This means that in a directed graph, in contrast to a undirected one, the order in which you list the nodes when you name the edges matters. Thus, the edge AB ...
  29. [29]
    Graph Models, Structures and Knowledge Graphs
    The graph model can represent complex relationships and dependencies that are difficult to model in a relational model, such as social networks, recommendation ...
  30. [30]
    What Are Nodes, Edges, and Properties in Graph Databases?
    Jul 1, 2024 · Nodes are entities storing data, edges connect nodes, and properties add detail to nodes and edges in graph databases.
  31. [31]
    [PDF] A Multigraph Approach to Social Network Analysis
    A multigraph approach uses different types of relations, allowing for loops, and uses vertex pairs instead of dyads, unlike simple graphs.
  32. [32]
    Facebook's Zuckerberg uncorks the social graph - ZDNET
    Zuckerberg attributed the power of Facebook to the "social graph," the network of connections and relationships between people on the service.
  33. [33]
    Under the Hood: Building out the infrastructure for Graph Search
    Mar 6, 2013 · Nodes in the graph are identified by a unique number called the fbid. The Facebook graph contains social information, such as friendships and ...
  34. [34]
    [PDF] TAO: Facebook's Distributed Data Store for the Social Graph - USENIX
    Jun 26, 2013 · Facebook was originally built by storing the social graph in MySQL, querying it from PHP, and caching results in memcache [21]. This lookaside ...
  35. [35]
    TAO: The power of the graph - Engineering at Meta
    the power of graph helps us tame the demanding and dynamic social workload.Memcache And Mysql · Tao Data Model And Api · Implementation
  36. [36]
    Overview - Graph API - Meta for Developers - Facebook
    a representation of the information on Facebook. It's composed of nodes, edges, and fields.Facebook SDKs · Access Levels · Paginated Results · Rate LimitsMissing: architecture | Show results with:architecture
  37. [37]
    An Introduction to Facebook's System Architecture: Social Graph ...
    Sep 6, 2020 · In this blog, I will mainly discuss two aspects of Facebook's backend system: How the social graph is modeled and stored, that is, the database ...
  38. [38]
    Facebook Unveils Facebook Ads - About Meta
    Facebook Social Advertising Event, Nov. 6, 2007 — Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg today introduced Facebook Ads, an ad ...
  39. [39]
    [PDF] WTF: The Who to Follow Service at Twitter - Stanford University
    THE TWITTER GRAPH. The Twitter graph consists of vertices representing users, connected by directed edges representing the “follow” rela- tionship, i.e. ...
  40. [40]
    Information network or social network?: the structure of the twitter ...
    We find that the Twitter follow graph exhibits structural characteristics of both an information network and a social network.
  41. [41]
    [PDF] Information Network or Social Network? The Structure of the Twitter ...
    Twitter's follow graph exhibits characteristics of both social and information networks, with the follow relationship primarily about information consumption, ...
  42. [42]
    Introducing FlockDB - Blog - X
    May 3, 2010 · Twitter stores many graphs of relationships between people: who you're following, who's following you, who you receive phone notifications ...
  43. [43]
    System Design of X/Twitter - Medium
    Jun 29, 2024 · FlockDB has been used by Twitter for managing graph data, particularly for Twitter's follow graph. Twitter needs to handle billions of ...
  44. [44]
    Twitter's Recommendation Algorithm - Blog - X
    Mar 31, 2023 · Twitter takes two approaches to addressing this. Social Graph. Our first approach is to estimate what you would find relevant by analyzing ...
  45. [45]
    The Real Twitter Files: The Algorithm - by Aakash Gupta
    Apr 2, 2023 · RealGraph takes information about the tweet, the tweet writer, and the potential tweet receiver to create a weighted graph to estimate the ...
  46. [46]
    Graph - LinkedIn Engineering
    The graph team builds and operates a novel distributed graph database which supports tens of terabytes of graph data and half a million QPS.
  47. [47]
    LinkedIn Shares More About its Graph Database - CDOTrends
    May 10, 2023 · The graph database in question is named LIquid, and it took LinkedIn four years of effort to build. According to a post on the LinkedIn ...
  48. [48]
    Network datasets: Social circles - SNAP: Stanford
    This dataset consists of 'circles' from Google+. Google+ data was collected from users who had manually shared their circles using the 'share circle' feature.
  49. [49]
    (PDF) New Kid on the Block: Exploring the Google+ Social Graph
    *Co: Comedian; Mu: Musician; IT: Information Technology Person; Bu: Businessman; Mo: Model;. Ac: Actor; So: Socialite; TV: Television Host; Jo: Journalist; ...
  50. [50]
    Content Graph vs Social Graph - squarelovin Blog
    Jul 11, 2024 · The social graph promotes social connections and interactions within the user's own network. As a result, users tend to stay more in their own ...The social graph: Facebook... · The content graph: TikTok and...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  51. [51]
    TikTok and the Fall of the Social-Media Giants | The New Yorker
    Jul 28, 2022 · This rejection of the social-graph model has allowed TikTok to circumvent the barriers to entry that so effectively protected early social ...
  52. [52]
    How TikTok Leveraged the Interest Graph to Redefine Social Media
    May 20, 2023 · TikTok's incredible rise can be attributed to its unique focus on the interest graph. This model prioritises connecting people based on shared interests.
  53. [53]
    The Open Graph protocol
    The Open Graph protocol was originally created at Facebook and is inspired by Dublin Core, link-rel canonical, Microformats, and RDFa. The specification ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
  54. [54]
    Taxonomies, Orders and Masses in Facebook's Open Graph
    Nov 9, 2014 · The Open Graph protocol, introduced in 2010, has allowed Facebook to extend its reach far beyond the confines of the platform itself. It ...
  55. [55]
    Open Graph Protocol - What is it and how does it work? - GetStream.io
    Open Graph protocol embeds meta tags in a web page's HTML to provide structured metadata for social media platforms to extract with bots called web crawlers.
  56. [56]
    Open Graph Image Guide: Boost Engagement & Clicks on Social ...
    Open Graph tags are pieces of code that control how URLs are displayed when shared on social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn.
  57. [57]
    O Geez - Abusing the Open Graph Protocol - ZeroFox
    Oct 22, 2018 · The Open Graph Protocol (OGP) is an 8-year-old standard originally developed by Facebook. It was created to help website owners integrate ...
  58. [58]
    Introduction to Semantic Graphs in MarkLogic
    May 25, 2025 · A representation of a resource such as a person or an entity. A node in an graph or triple. Predicate. A representation of a property or ...
  59. [59]
    What Is a Knowledge Graph? | IBM
    A knowledge graph, also known as a semantic network, represents a network of real-world entities—such as objects, events, situations or concepts ...
  60. [60]
    From social networks to knowledge graphs - ScienceDirect.com
    This is a representation of general knowledge in graph format. Knowledge graphs also play an important role in the Semantic Web and are also called semantic ...
  61. [61]
    [PDF] Semantic Social Network Analysis - arXiv
    In this paper, we propose leveraging semantic web technologies to merge and exploit the best features of each domain.
  62. [62]
    Semantic graph embedding for text representation - ScienceDirect
    A semantic graph is a network that represents the semantic relationships between different concepts [2]. Network vertices represent concepts and network edges ...
  63. [63]
    What are Social Graphs and Interest Graphs, and Do I Have Them?
    Jun 12, 2025 · An interest graph is about what you like—it connects you to other people based on shared interests, hobbies and topics, rather than personal ...
  64. [64]
    Interest Graph Algorithm: How Social Media Knows You - Single Grain
    May 3, 2024 · In this post, we'll explore the shift from the social graph to the interest graph in social media algorithms, why feeds now favor interests over friends,The Shift from Social Graph to... · Social Graph · Interest Graph
  65. [65]
    How Social Graph vs Interest Graph Algorithms Impact Ads - Madgicx
    Oct 2, 2025 · Interest graphs offer superior discovery potential with 150% higher engagement rates, while social graphs excel at retargeting with stronger ...Missing: explanation | Show results with:explanation
  66. [66]
    Mastering Social Media Algorithms: The Interest Graph vs the Social ...
    Apr 7, 2025 · An influencer with a strong Social Graph is more likely to have a loyal and engaged following, leading to higher engagement rates and a more ...
  67. [67]
    The Shift From Social Graphs to Socio-interest Graphs within Social ...
    Sep 12, 2022 · Social graphs connect users to their network, while socio-interest graphs consider content interests, like TikTok's, where interest is as ...Missing: explanation | Show results with:explanation
  68. [68]
    Exploiting the semantic similarity of interests in ... - ACM Digital Library
    Apr 4, 2016 · In this work, we propose a novel semantic similarity measure for calculating the similarity between resources. We show preliminary results on ...Missing: extensions | Show results with:extensions
  69. [69]
    One Trillion Edges: Graph Processing at Facebook-Scale
    In this paper, we describe the usability, performance, and scalability improvements we made to Apache Giraph, an open-source graph processing system.Missing: nodes 2023<|separator|>
  70. [70]
    [PDF] Graph Databases: Their Power and Limitations - Hal-Inria
    Jan 24, 2017 · A special attention is de- voted to so-called Big Graphs, e.g. Facebook with 1 Billion nodes and 140 Billion edges, requiring special storage ...
  71. [71]
    TAO: Facebook's Distributed Data Store for the Social Graph
    TAO is a geographically distributed data store that provides efficient and timely access to the social graph for Facebook's demanding workload using a fixed set ...
  72. [72]
    Scalability Issues in Online Social Networks | ACM Computing Surveys
    In this survey, we provide a comprehensive study of social networks along with their significant characteristics and categorize social network architectures ...
  73. [73]
    [PDF] The Ubiquity of Large Graphs and Surprising Challenges of Graph ...
    Challenge of Scalability: Scalability is unequivocally the most pressing challenge faced by participants. The ability to process very large graphs efficiently ...
  74. [74]
    LSMGraph: A High-Performance Dynamic Graph Storage System ...
    Nov 10, 2024 · We propose LSMGraph, a novel dynamic graph storage system that combines the write-friendly LSM-tree and the read-friendly CSR.
  75. [75]
    [PDF] Big Graphs: Challenges and Opportunities - VLDB Endowment
    ABSTRACT. Big data is typically characterized with 4V's: Volume, Velocity, Va- riety and Veracity. When it comes to big graphs, these challenges.
  76. [76]
    [PDF] Social Network Analysis: Centrality Measures - Donglei Du
    Centrality measures address the question: "Who is the most important or central person in this network?" There are many answers to this question, ...
  77. [77]
    Betweenness Centrality and Other Essential Centrality Measures in ...
    Sep 1, 2023 · Betweenness centrality is a fundamental algorithm in network analysis that quantifies the influence or control that a node has over the flow of information.
  78. [78]
    Network Centrality: Understanding Degree, Closeness ...
    Apr 16, 2021 · Network centrality is among the most well-known social network analysis metrics, measuring the degree to which a person or organization is central to a network.
  79. [79]
    Efficient algorithms based on centrality measures for identification of ...
    The proposed algorithms combine between the degree centrality as local measure and the Katz centrality as global centrality metric on a graph with preselected ...
  80. [80]
    Comparative Analysis of Community Detection Algorithms on ... - arXiv
    This paper compares community detection algorithms like Louvain, Girvan-Newman, and Spectral Clustering on the SNAP Social Circles dataset, using metrics like ...
  81. [81]
    Community Detection: Getting Started within Graphs and Networks
    Feb 23, 2024 · Clustering algorithms form the backbone of many community detection methods, providing efficient mechanisms for grouping nodes into communities.What is a Community? · Girvan-Newman Algorithm for... · Community Detection i...
  82. [82]
    A guide for choosing community detection algorithms in social ...
    Six community detection methods are discussed: Walktrap, Edge-Betweenness, Infomap, Louvain, Label Propagation, and Spinglass.
  83. [83]
    [PDF] The Link-Prediction Problem for Social Networks - Computer Science
    The link-prediction problem asks if we can infer future interactions in a social network based on its current snapshot, using network features.
  84. [84]
    Link Prediction in Social Networks - SpringerLink
    This work presents link prediction similarity measures for social networks that exploit the degree distribution of the networks.
  85. [85]
    A Survey of Graph Neural Networks for Social Recommender Systems
    Dec 8, 2022 · We conduct a comprehensive and systematic review of the literature on GNN-based SocialRS. In this survey, we first identify 84 papers on GNN-based SocialRS.<|control11|><|separator|>
  86. [86]
    A Critical Review of Centrality Measures in Social Networks
    Aug 9, 2025 · Centrality measures aim to identify the most important vertices in networks. They play significant roles across multiple domains, including ...
  87. [87]
    Link Prediction for Social Networks using Representation Learning ...
    Mar 13, 2024 · We explore various feature extraction techniques to generate representations of nodes and edges in a social network that allow us to predict missing links.
  88. [88]
    Applications of link prediction in social networks: A review
    Sep 15, 2020 · Link prediction in social networks is used for inferring social interactions, suggesting friends, and for detection, recommendation, and ...
  89. [89]
    Real-World Graph Analysis: Techniques for Static, Dynamic, and ...
    May 17, 2024 · This paper focuses on extracting knowledge from static, dynamic, and temporal graphs, using community substructures and combinatorial  ...
  90. [90]
    Inferring private information using social network data
    In this paper, we explore how to launch inference attacks using released social networking data to predict undisclosed private information about individuals.
  91. [91]
    Attribute Inference Attacks via Users' Social Friends and Behaviors
    We propose new privacy attacks to infer attributes (e.g., locations, occupations, and interests) of online social network users.
  92. [92]
    Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge ...
    Mar 17, 2018 · Cambridge Analytica spent nearly $1m on data collection, which yielded more than 50 million individual profiles that could be matched to electoral rolls.
  93. [93]
    Facebook/Cambridge Analytica: Privacy lessons and a way forward
    Mar 20, 2018 · A political research and data science firm called Cambridge Analytica had inappropriately harvested data from the Facebook profiles of over 50 million people.
  94. [94]
    The Graph API: Key Points in the Facebook and Cambridge ...
    Mar 20, 2018 · The Graph API is the underlying issue in the Cambridge Analytica data-sharing voter “micro-targeting” debacle.
  95. [95]
    Leaking privacy and shadow profiles in online social networks - PMC
    Aug 4, 2017 · Shadow profiles could be constructed without permission or knowledge of the person who is being profiled, who might not be a user nor agree to ...
  96. [96]
    Investigating shadow profiles: The data of others - Tech Xplore
    Sep 22, 2023 · Shadow profiles in social networks contain information about people who are not members. At the moment, shadow profiles are almost impossible to prevent using ...
  97. [97]
    Social Media Privacy - Epic.org
    Too many social media platforms are built on excessive collection, algorithmic processing, and commercial exploitation of users' personal data.Missing: graph | Show results with:graph
  98. [98]
    110+ of the Latest Data Breach Statistics to Know for 2026 & Beyond
    Sep 24, 2025 · 2025 saw over 4,000 incidents of social engineering attacks—85% of which (3,405) had confirmed data disclosure. This accounts for 28% of ...
  99. [99]
    Comprehensive Privacy Risk Assessment in Social Networks Using ...
    Jul 20, 2025 · Graph-based methods have been used to evaluate privacy risks stemming from user connections and structural positioning. Zhao et al. (Zhao et al.Missing: incidents | Show results with:incidents
  100. [100]
    Comprehensive Privacy Risk Assessment in Social Networks Using ...
    Sep 19, 2025 · Our CPRS framework integrates social graph and textual data for holistic privacy risk analysis but has scalability limitations for real-.
  101. [101]
    [PDF] SybilDefender: Defend Against Sybil Attacks in Large Social Networks
    Abstract—Distributed systems without trusted identities are particularly vulnerable to sybil attacks, where an adversary creates multiple bogus identities ...
  102. [102]
    A Near-Optimal Social Network Defense against Sybil Attacks
    This paper presents the novel SybilLimit protocol that leverages the same insight as SybilGuard but offers dramatically improved and near-optimal guarantees.<|separator|>
  103. [103]
    Adversarial Privacy Preserving Graph Embedding against Inference ...
    Aug 30, 2020 · However, existing graph embedding methods do not consider users' privacy to prevent inference attacks. That is, adversaries can infer users ...
  104. [104]
    [PDF] Inference Attacks Against Graph Neural Networks - USENIX
    For instance, if the target graph is a social network, the reconstructed graph would then allow an adversary to gain direct knowledge of sensitive social rela-.
  105. [105]
    [PDF] Disparate Vulnerability in Link Inference Attacks against Graph ...
    For example, it will be more difficult for. LGBT users to hide their sexual orientation than non-LGBT ones as the sexual orientation information can be inferred ...
  106. [106]
    Link Membership Inference Attacks against Unsupervised Graph ...
    Dec 4, 2023 · This paper investigates the privacy vulnerabilities of UGRL models through the lens of link membership inference attack (LMIA). Specifically, an ...
  107. [107]
    A novel model for Sybil attack detection in online social network ...
    Nov 8, 2023 · The Sybil attack is predicated on the idea that computers in a network are unable to confirm and validate each other's identities in unreliable ...
  108. [108]
    Defense against membership inference attack in graph neural ... - NIH
    Dec 16, 2022 · In this paper, we investigate the privacy problem of embedding representations of nodes, in which an adversary can infer the user's privacy by ...
  109. [109]
    [PDF] Roadmap for an Antitrust Case Against Facebook - Omidyar Network
    Social graphs give social media platforms the ability to identify connections between consumers. Therefore, YouTube cannot recommend videos based on consumers' ...
  110. [110]
    First Amendment Problems with Using Antitrust Law Against Social ...
    Oct 15, 2025 · Antitrust law, however, does “not shield regulation aimed at expressive decisions from First Amendment scrutiny.”55 In comments filed with the ...
  111. [111]
    The GDPR and Facebook and Google, Intelligent Tracking ...
    the ability to export your lists of friends from one ...
  112. [112]
    Utah Digital Choice Act: Reshaping Social Media - Ash Center
    Jun 10, 2025 · The Utah Digital Choice Act mandates portability practices for your personal data and social graph. This Act uses the definition of personal ...Missing: regulation | Show results with:regulation
  113. [113]
    [PDF] Is User Data Exported From Facebook Actually Useful to Competitors?
    Data portability efforts on social networks, like the Graph API and DYI, come with their own set of distinct issues. Most importantly, they face a tradeoff ...
  114. [114]
    Why Utah's 'Simple' Social Media Reform Could Set a Dangerous ...
    Feb 24, 2025 · By mandating the sharing of intimate social graph data, the bill undermines established privacy protections, hands power back to entrenched ...
  115. [115]
    The Antitrust Duty to Deal in the Age of Big Tech - Yale Law Journal
    Mar 5, 2022 · However, the rise of dominant platforms like Google, Facebook, and Amazon has provoked intense debate over whether the antitrust duty to deal ...
  116. [116]
    Facebook and the Cost of Monopoly - Stratechery
    Apr 19, 2017 · This self-selection, particularly onto a “free” platform, makes it very difficult to calculate what cost, if any, Facebook's seeming monopoly ...Missing: ethical issues
  117. [117]
    [PDF] Social Media or Social Monopoly: Rethinking Antitrust Regulation in ...
    Mar 18, 2025 · The lack of clarity results in insufficient regulation. Today, social networks and various e-platforms are increasingly acquiring monopoly ...
  118. [118]
    Global Social Media Statistics - DataReportal
    The world's biggest social media platforms · Facebook has 3.07 billion monthly active users (see more Facebook stats here) · WhatsApp has 3 billion monthly active ...Facebook Users, Stats, Data... · Instagram Users, Stats, Data... · About<|separator|>
  119. [119]
    Social network models predict movement and connectivity in ... - PNAS
    Social network models provide accurate predictions of network structure, and can do so with remarkably limited data on movement.Results · Materials And Methods · Social Network ConstructionsMissing: achievements | Show results with:achievements
  120. [120]
    5 Top AI Applications of Graph Algorithms | Professional Education
    Jun 10, 2025 · 5 Top AI Applications of Graph Algorithms · 1. Recommendation Engines: · 2. Fraud Detection: · 3. Drug Development: · 4. Social Network Analysis: · 5 ...
  121. [121]
    The Economic Effects of Social Networks | NBER
    Researchers have long understood that social interactions can shape many aspects of social and economic activity, including migration, trade, job-seeking, ...
  122. [122]
    [PDF] The Economic Effects of Social Networks - NYU Stern
    Oct 30, 2018 · We show how data from online social networking services can help re- searchers better understand the effects of social interactions on eco-.
  123. [123]
    Social media networks, fake news, and polarization - ScienceDirect
    We study how the structure of social media networks and the presence of fake news affects the degree of misinformation and polarization in a society.
  124. [124]
    Facebook went away. Political divides didn't budge. | Stanford ...
    May 13, 2024 · For one thing, the results support the view that Facebook may create harm by distributing misinformation. Gentzkow says it's also possible that ...
  125. [125]
    A study found Facebook's algorithm didn't promote political ...
    Sep 26, 2024 · ... polarization has drawn a pointed critique of its methods and conclusions. ... misinformation. They say the paper failed to properly alert readers ...
  126. [126]
    The role of (social) media in political polarization: a systematic review
    Sep 21, 2021 · ... misinformation on social media. ... Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature.Missing: graph | Show results with:graph
  127. [127]
    Social Media Use and Depressive Symptoms During Early ...
    May 21, 2025 · The findings suggest that more time spent on social media during early adolescence may contribute to increased depressive symptoms over time.
  128. [128]
    Social Media Addiction Predicts Compromised Mental Health as ...
    Mar 27, 2024 · The results from the meta-analysis showed that problematic social media use correlated positively with psychological distress (e.g., depression) ...
  129. [129]
    Problematic Social Networking Site use-effects on mental health and ...
    Studies have shown a positive correlation between Problematic SNS use and depression (12–18) anxiety (12, 14, 16–19), ADHD and OCD (12) and stress (14, 19).
  130. [130]
    Understanding Social Media Addiction: A Deep Dive - PMC - NIH
    Oct 27, 2024 · The long-term use of social media could negatively impact sleep quality, which exacerbates mental health problems, according to studies [7,15,16] ...
  131. [131]
    Problematic Social Media Use in Adolescents and Young Adults
    Apr 14, 2022 · This study seeks to systematically examine problematic social media use in youth and its association with symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress.
  132. [132]
    Foundations of Web3 Social Graphs - Gate.com
    At the technical core of Web3 social graphs are wallet addresses, decentralized identifiers (DIDs), ENS handles, and blockchain-based records. Wallet addresses ...
  133. [133]
    The Social Graph: Understanding the Web of Connections - Webisoft
    The social graph is a model that represents social relations between entities. It is essentially a representation of a social network, where the term “graph” is ...Missing: origin | Show results with:origin
  134. [134]
    What Is a Social Graph's Role in Your Social Media Experience?
    A social graph maps your relationships and activity on a social network. You could visualize your social graph as a bunch of lines connecting you to your ...
  135. [135]
    A brief history of Web3 social networking in the past seven years
    Aug 17, 2023 · The earliest Web3 social network was @steemit, created by BM in 2016. From then until today, in the blink of an eye, Web3 social has developed ...
  136. [136]
    What is Lens Protocol? - Zen Media
    Jul 6, 2023 · Lens Protocol is not a standalone social network but rather a permissionless and composable social graph built on top of the Polygon blockchain.
  137. [137]
    What is Lens Protocol: Open Social Media on the Blockchain
    Jul 18, 2023 · Lens Protocol is a decentralized social graph that provides the infrastructure for Web3 social media platforms.
  138. [138]
    What is the decentralized social media platform Farcaster? - Coinbase
    Farcaster is a protocol that seeks to bring changes to the social media landscape by addressing concerns of privacy, monopolization, and censorship.
  139. [139]
    Getting Started - Farcaster Docs
    Farcaster is a sufficiently decentralized social network built on Ethereum. It is a public social network similar to X and Reddit.
  140. [140]
    From Control To Community: Farcaster And The Future Of Social ...
    Nov 4, 2024 · Farcaster is a decentralized social media platform built on blockchain technology, giving users control over their data and identity.
  141. [141]
    The Power of Web3 Social Graphs: Revolutionizing Social Media for ...
    May 16, 2023 · The Web3 social graph is a decentralized network that is built on blockchain technology, offering several benefits over the Web 2.0 social graph.
  142. [142]
    Lens Protocol - Onchain App (Social) - Coinbase
    Lens Protocol is a composable and decentralized social graph, ready for you to build on so you can focus on creating a great experience, not scaling your users.
  143. [143]
    Decentralized Social Media: Is DeSoc Ready for Prime Time?
    What are the challenges for decentralized social media platforms? Decentralized social media networks face major hurdles in achieving mainstream adoption.
  144. [144]
    Farcaster Beginners Guide: Exploring the Decentralized SocialFi ...
    Aug 21, 2025 · Learn how Farcaster's blockchain mechanics, privacy focus, and earning opportunities like $DEGEN tips set it apart from traditional platforms.
  145. [145]
    Blockchain social media: The rise of decentralized social platforms
    Dec 20, 2023 · Challenges and limitations of decentralized social networks · Technological understanding: · Scalability: · Transaction fees: · Public perception of ...<|separator|>
  146. [146]
    Status Quo, Challenges and Prospect of Decentralized Social ...
    Mar 7, 2023 · Decentralized social protocols also face some challenges, such as scaling, user experience, and privacy protection, which may affect their ...
  147. [147]
    Decentralized social networks and the future of free speech online
    Decentralized networks also face the challenge of dealing with bad content. This challenge is thornier for decentralized networks because their structural ...
  148. [148]
    Graph neural networks: A review of methods and applications
    Graph neural networks (GNNs) are neural models that capture the dependence of graphs via message passing between the nodes of graphs.
  149. [149]
    A Gentle Introduction to Graph Neural Networks - Distill.pub
    Sep 2, 2021 · This article explores and explains modern graph neural networks. We divide this work into four parts. First, we look at what kind of data is most naturally ...
  150. [150]
    [PDF] Graph Neural Networks for Social Recommendation - arXiv
    Figure 1: Graph Data in Social Recommendation. It contains two graphs including the user-item graph (left part) and the user-user social graph (right part).
  151. [151]
    Application of artificial intelligence graph convolutional network in ...
    Sep 1, 2025 · In the graph construction process, this study introduces a weighted social graph generation method based on multi-source behavioral data ...
  152. [152]
    Using Graph Neural Networks for Social Recommendations - MDPI
    Nov 10, 2023 · In this work, we propose the RelationalNet algorithm, which not only models user–item, and user–user relationships but also item–item relationships with graphs.Using Graph Neural Networks... · 3. Methodology · 4. Experimental Evaluation
  153. [153]
    Graphs Meet AI Agents: Taxonomy, Progress, and Future ... - arXiv
    Jun 22, 2025 · This survey presents a first systematic review of how graphs can empower AI agents. Specifically, we explore the integration of graph techniques with core ...
  154. [154]
    The Confluence of Social Network Graphs and Large Language ...
    The integration of these technologies is empowering businesses to operate in a near real-time intelligence mode. Jaxon has built platforms that use this blend ...<|separator|>
  155. [155]
  156. [156]
    Graph Neural Networks for Social Network Analysis - ACE Journal
    Jun 9, 2025 · GNNs can model how influence propagates through a social network—critical for applications such as viral marketing and misinformation tracking.