[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Media trustworthiness verification and event assessment through an integrated framework: a case-study

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nowadays, information is provided through diverse network channels and, above all, its diffusion occurs in an always faster and pervasive manner. Social Media (SM) plays a crucial role in distributing, in an uncontrolled way, news, opinions, media contents and so on, and can basically contribute to spread information that sometimes are untrue and misleading. An integrated assessment of the trustworthiness of the information that is delivered is claimed from different sides: the Secure! project strictly fits in such a context. The project has been studying and developing a service oriented infrastructure which, by resorting at diverse technological tools based on image forensics, source reputation analysis, Twitter message trend analysis, web source retrieval and crawling, and so on, provides an integrated event assessment especially regarding crisis management. The aim of this paper is to present an interesting case-study which demonstrates the potentiality of the developed system to achieve a new integrated knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Secure! project, http://secure.eng.it/

  2. www.repubblica.it/politica/2015/02/28/news/lega_-108382515/

References

  1. Adi A, Etzion O (2004) Amit - the situation manager. VLDB J 13(2):177–203. doi:10.1007/s00778-003-0108-y

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Aiello L, Petkos G, Martin C, Corney D, Papadopoulos S, Skraba R, Goker A, Kompatsiaris I, Jaimes A (2013) Sensing trending topics in twitter. IEEE Trans Multimedia 15(6):1268–1282. doi:10.1109/TMM.2013.2265080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Amerini I, Ballan L, Caldelli R, Del Bimbo A, Serra G (2011) A SIFT-based forensic method for copy move attack detection and transformation recovery. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 6(3):1099 –1110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Amerini I, Ballan L, Caldelli R, Bimbo AD, Tongo LD, Serra G (2013) Copy-move forgery detection and localization by means of robust clustering with j-linkage. Signal Process Image Commun 28(6):659–669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Amerini I, Becarelli R, Caldelli R, Casini M (2015) A feature-based forensic procedure for splicing forgeries detection Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2015. doi:10.1155/2015/653164

  6. Boididou C, Papadopoulos S, Kompatsiaris Y, Schifferes S, Newman N (2014) Challenges of computational verification in social multimedia. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on world wide web, WWW ’14 Companion. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland. doi:10.1145/2567948.2579323, pp 743–748

  7. Derczynski L, Bontcheva K (2014) Pheme: veracity in digital social networks. In: Posters, demos, late-breaking results and workshop proceedings of the 22nd conference on user modeling, adaptation, and personalization co-located with the 22nd conference on user modeling, adaptation, and personalization (UMAP2014), Aalborg, Denmark, 7–11 July 2014

  8. Derczynski L, Maynard D, Rizzo G, van Erp M, Gorrell G, Troncy R, Petrak J, Bontcheva K (2015) Analysis of named entity recognition and linking for tweets. Inf Process Manag 51(2):32–49. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2014.10.006. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306457314001034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Esper T, EsperTech I (2014) Esper Reference version 4.9.0. http://esper.codehaus.org

  10. Etzion O, Niblett P (2011) Event processing in action. MANNING

  11. Fischler MA, Bolles RC (1981) Random sample consensus: A paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Commun ACM 24(6):381–395. doi:10.1145/358669.358692

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Gupta A, Lamba H, Kumaraguru P, Joshi A (2013) Faking sandy: characterizing and identifying fake images on twitter during hurricane sandy. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on world wide web, WWW ’13 companion. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland, pp 729–736

  13. Itria ML, Ceccarelli AD (2014) A complex event processing approach for crisis-management systems. In: EDCC workshop big4CIP

  14. Jøsang A, Roslan I (2002) The beta reputation system. In: Proceedings of the 15th bled electronic commerce conference

  15. Kumar S, Morstatter F, Liu H (2014) Twitter data analytics. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Lowe DG (2004) Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int J Comput Vis 60(2):91–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mao Z, Li N, Winsborough W. (2006) Distributed credential chain discovery in trust management with parameterized roles and constraints, vol 4307, pp 159–173

  18. Mathioudakis M, Koudas N (2010) Twittermonitor: trend detection over the twitter stream. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGMOD intern. conference on management of data. doi:10.1145/1807167.1807306, New York, pp 1155–1158

  19. Middleton SE (2015) Extracting attributed verification and debunking reports from social media: mediaeval-2015 trust and credibility analysis of image and video. In: Working notes proceedings of the MediaEval 2015 workshop, Wurzen, Germany, September 14–15, CEUR-WS.org, ISSN 1613-0073. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1436/Paper_43.pdf

  20. Popoola A, Krasnoshtan D, Toth AP, Naroditskiy V, Castillo C, Meier P, Rahwan I (2013) Information verification during natural disasters. In: Carr L, Laender AHF, Lscio BF, King I, Fontoura M, Vrandecic D, Aroyo L, de Oliveira JPM, Lima F, Wilde E (eds) WWW (Companion Volume). International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee / ACM, pp 1029–1032

  21. Sakaki T, Okazaki M, Matsuo Y (2010) Earthquake shakes twitter users: real-time event detection by social sensors. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on world wide web, WWW ’10. doi:10.1145/1772690.1772777. ACM, New York, pp 851–860

  22. Sherchan W, Nepal S, Paris C (2013) A survey of trust in social networks. ACM Comput Surv 45(4):47:1–47:33. doi:10.1145/2501654.2501661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Stamm M, Min W, Liu K (2013) Information forensics: an overview of the first decade. Access, IEEE 1:167–200. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2013.2260814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Zubiaga A, Liakata M, Procter RN, Bontcheva K, Tolmie P (2015) Towards detecting rumours in social media. In: AAAI workshop on AI for cities

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the SECURE! Project, funded by the POR CreO FESR 2007–2013 programme of the Tuscany Region (Italy).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Media Integration and Communication Center, University of Florence, Florence, Italy

    Irene Amerini, Rudy Becarelli & Roberto Caldelli

  2. National Interuniversity Consortium for Telecommunications (CNIT), Parma, Italy

    Roberto Caldelli

  3. Resiltech S.R.L., Pontedera (Pisa), Italy

    Francesco Brancati & Massimiliano L. Itria

  4. Engineering S.P.A., Roma, Italy

    Gabriele Giunta

Authors
  1. Irene Amerini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rudy Becarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesco Brancati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roberto Caldelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gabriele Giunta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Massimiliano L. Itria
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Irene Amerini.

Appendix: Definition of terms

Appendix: Definition of terms

The term event is defined as “an occurrence within a particular system or domain; it is something that has happened, or is contemplated as having happened in that domain” [10]. In the Secure! project this definition considers those events that happen in the real world and are represented in computing systems through structured information. Hence, in the Secure! project, each event contains the texture description of the real event, the time/space (when/where it happened), the entity involved and the source that generated it. For sake of clarity we define the terms micro-event, complex-event and situation. The term micro-event refers to a simple real event involving one entity only (e.g., people, fire presence, logo recognition, weapon detection) that could be critical or not, therefore the framework needs to analyze it in detail by using other available information. On the other hand, complex-events are the aggregation, correlation and integration result of the information contained in a set of micro-events which are correlated by spatial, temporal and causal relations defined by correlation rules. A complex-event suggests a situation in progress or a part of it (e.g., people demonstration with the presence of crowd and police, vandalism smearing monuments). In the Secure! project complex-events have been classified through an event taxonomy 1. With the term situation, as defined in [1], we intend “one or more complex-event occurrence that might require a reaction”. When a critical situation happens a number of specific complex-events occur, the commixture and the correlation of them identifies the specific situation in progress requiring appropriate reactions, for example providing first aid or police intervention.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amerini, I., Becarelli, R., Brancati, F. et al. Media trustworthiness verification and event assessment through an integrated framework: a case-study. Multimed Tools Appl 76, 7197–7212 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-016-3303-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-016-3303-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation