Papers › Towards Quantifying Sampling Bias in Network Inference
Towards Quantifying Sampling Bias in Network Inference
Lisette Espín-Noboa, Claudia Wagner, Fariba Karimi, Kristina Lerman
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Relational inference leverages relationships between entities and links in a network to infer information about the network from a small sample. This method is often used when global information about the network is not available or difficult to obtain. However, how reliable is inference from a small labelled sample? How should the network be sampled, and what effect does it have on inference error? How does the structure of the network impact the sampling strategy? We address these questions by systematically examining how network sampling strategy and sample size affect accuracy of relational inference in networks. To this end, we generate a family of synthetic networks where nodes have a binary attribute and a tunable level of homophily. As expected, we find that in heterophilic networks, we can obtain good accuracy when only small samples of the network are initially labelled, regardless of the sampling strategy. Surprisingly, this is not the case for homophilic networks, and sampling strategies that work well in heterophilic networks lead to large inference errors. These findings suggest that the impact of network structure on relational classification is more complex than previously thought.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections