Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

How to find Paul Revere as a rebel without knowing his history or background

Expand Messages
  • Mohammad Imran
    This article is a great example of the use of the so called, Meta Data in data mining. For those of you who are interested in matrix algebra this is an
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 12, 2013
      This article is a great example of the use of the so called, "Meta Data" in data mining. For those of you who are interested in matrix algebra this is an interesting example of the use of matrices to arrive at a desired result. In this case finding the most interacting contact from among a slew of names without actually knowing anything about individuals or their life histories. For others this is an insight how the governments can hone in on individuals doing nefarious work or doing political work agains the existing establishment without going through search and find on individual basis. Use of the most powerful computers have made it possible to analyze millions of meta data within reasonable time.

      The government of the USA or any other government are correct when they say they are only collecting meta data but not the data on every individual in their country. However by using meta data the governments can hone in on individuals and groups they do not like. This is the first step for political (fascist) control of a country by an ideological entity like the Tea party.

      Kieran Healy

        Using Metadata to Find Paul Revere

        JUN 9TH, 2013

        London, 1772.

        I have been asked by my superiors to give a brief demonstration of the surprising effectiveness of even the simplest techniques of the new-fangled Social Networke Analysis in the pursuit of those who would seek to undermine the liberty enjoyed by His Majesty’s subjects. This is in connection with the discussion of the role of “metadata” in certain recent events and the assurances of various respectable partiesthat the government was merely “sifting through this so-called metadata” and that the “information acquired does not include the content of any communications”. I will show how we can use this “metadata” to find key persons involved in terrorist groups operating within the Colonies at the present time. I shall also endeavour to show how these methods work in what might be called a relational manner.

        The analysis in this report is based on information gathered by our field agent Mr David Hackett Fischer and published in an Appendix to his lengthy report to the government. As you may be aware, Mr Fischer is an expert and respected field Agent with a broad and deep knowledge of the colonies. I, on the other hand, have made my way from Ireland with just a little quantitative training—I placed several hundred rungs below the Senior Wrangler during my time at Cambridge—and I am presently employed as a junior analytical scribe at ye olde National Security Administration. Sorry, I mean the Royal Security Administration. And I should emphasize again that I know nothing of current affairs in the colonies. However, our current Eighteenth Century beta of PRISM has been used to collect and analyze information on more than two hundred and sixty persons (of varying degrees of suspicion) belonging variously to seven different organizations in the Boston area.

        Rest assured that we only collected metadata on these people, and no actual conversations were recorded or meetings transcribed. All I know is whether someone was a member of an organization or not. Surely this is but a small encroachment on the freedom of the Crown’s subjects. I have been asked, on the basis of this poor information, to present some names for our field agents in the Colonies to work with. It seems an unlikely task.

        If you want to follow along yourself, there is a secret repository containing the data and the appropriate commands for your portable analytical engine.

        Here is what the data look like.

                       StAndrewsLodge LoyalNine NorthCaucus LongRoomClub TeaParty Bostoncommittee LondonEnemies 
        Adams.John                      0         0           1            1        0               0             0
        Adams.Samuel                    0         0           1            1        0               1             1
        Allen.Dr                        0         0           1            0        0               0             0
        Appleton.Nathaniel              0         0           1            0        0               1             0
        Ash.Gilbert                     1         0           0            0        0               0             0
        Austin.Benjamin                 0         0           0            0        0               0             1
        Austin.Samuel                   0         0           0            0        0               0             1
        Avery.John                      0         1           0            0        0               0             1
        Baldwin.Cyrus                   0         0           0            0        0               0             1
        Ballard.John                    0         0           1            0        0               0             0

        The organizations are listed in the columns, and the names in the rows. As you can see, membership is represented by a “1”. So this Samuel Adams person (whoever he is), belongs to the North Caucus, the Long Room Club, the Boston Committee, and the London Enemies List. I must say, these organizational names sound rather belligerent.

        Anyway, what can get from these meagre metadata? This table is large and cumbersome. I am a pretty low-level operative at ye olde RSA, so I have to keep it simple. My superiors, I am quite sure, have far more sophisticated analytical techniques at their disposal. I will simply start at the very beginning and follow a technique laid out in a beautiful paper by my brilliant former colleague, Mr Ron Breiger, called ”The Duality of Persons and Groups.” He wrote it as a graduate student at Harvard, some thirty five years ago. (Harvard, you may recall, is what passes for a university in the Colonies. No matter.) The paper describes what we now think of as a basic way to represent information about links between people and some other kind of thing, like attendance at various events, or membership in various groups. The foundational papers in this new science of social networke analysis, in fact, are almost all about what you can tell about people and their social lives based on metadata only, without much reference to the actual content of what they say.

        Mr Breiger’s insight was that our table of 254 rows and seven columns is an adjacency matrix, and that a bit of matrix multiplication can bring out information that is in the table but perhaps hard to see. Take this adjacency matrix of people and groups and transpose it—that is, flip it over on its side, so that the rows are now the columns andvice versa. Now we have two tables, or matrices, a 254x7 one showing “People by Groups” and the other a 7x254 one showing “Groups by People”. Call the first one the adjacency matrix A and the second one its transpose, AT. Now, as you will recall there are rules for multiplying matrices together. If you multiply out A(AT), you will get a big matrix with 254 rows and 254 columns. That is, it will be a 254x254 “Person by Person” matrix, where both the rows and columns are people (in the same order) and the cells show the number of organizations any particular pair of people both belonged to. Is that not marvelous? I have always thought this operation is somewhat akin to magick, especially as it involves moving one hand down and the other one across in a manner not wholly removed from an incantation.

        I cannot show you the whole Person by Person matrix, because I would have to kill you. I jest, I jest! It is just because it is rather large. But here is a little snippet of it. At this point in the eighteenth century, a 254x254 matrix is what we call ”Bigge Data”. I have an upcoming EDWARDx talk about it. You should come. Anyway:

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.