Difference between revisions of "APA Final Progress"

From Analytics Practicum
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(added new graph)
(reduced space)
Line 33: Line 33:
 
<li>Thus, we must weigh the ties differently using subject line weighting, reply rate, whether the email is a reply, forward or cc, hierarchy of email senders or recipients etc.</li>
 
<li>Thus, we must weigh the ties differently using subject line weighting, reply rate, whether the email is a reply, forward or cc, hierarchy of email senders or recipients etc.</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
<br><br>
+
<br>
 
</p>
 
</p>
<br>
 
 
[[File:Prel analysis 1.jpg|520px|center]]
 
[[File:Prel analysis 1.jpg|520px|center]]
 
<br>
 
<br>

Revision as of 16:13, 17 February 2017

APA logo.png

HOME

 

PROJECT OVERVIEW

 

PROJECT FINDINGS

 

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

 

DOCUMENTATION

 
Preliminary analysis

  • Exploration of network : filtered for internal employees only
  • Looked for trends based on size of message : no correlation
  • Eigenvector centrality analysis : Found biased data- Although the network generated showed certain employees to have high influence, when we showed our results to the client, they mentioned that those individuals aren’t actually that influential. We understood that this was because the ties were given equal weightage.
  • Thus, we must weigh the ties differently using subject line weighting, reply rate, whether the email is a reply, forward or cc, hierarchy of email senders or recipients etc.


Prel analysis 1.jpg


Blue = high eigenvector; White = mid; Red = low; Size of node = outdegree