Network Growth From Global and Local Influential Nodes

In graph theory and network analysis, node degree is defined as a simple but powerful centrality to measure the local influence of node in a complex network. Preferential attachment based on node degree has been widely adopted for modeling network growth. However, many evidences exist which show deviation of real network growth from what a pure degree-based model suggests. It seems that node degree is not a reliable measure for predicting the preference of newcomers in attaching to the network, or at least, it does not tell the whole story. In this paper, we argue that there is another dimension to network growth, one that we call node “coreness”. The new dimension gives insights on the global influence of nodes, in comparison to the local view the degree metric provides. We found that the probability of existing nodes attracting new nodes generally follows an exponential dependence on node coreness, while at the same time, follows a power-law dependence on node degree. That is to say, high-coreness nodes are more powerful than high-degree nodes in attracting newcomers. The new dimension further discloses some hidden phenomena which happen in the process of network growth. The power of node degree in attracting newcomers increases over time while the influence of coreness decreases, and finally, they reach a state of equilibrium in the growth. All these theories have been tested on real-world networks.

[1]  P. Bonacich.  Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures , 1987, American Journal of Sociology.

[2]  Jun Zhu,et al.  User grouping behavior in online forums , 2009, KDD.

[3]  Franco Scarselli,et al.  Inside PageRank , 2005, TOIT.

[4]  Kun Li,et al.  From sparse to dense and from assortative to disassortative in online social networks , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[5]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[6]  Fredrik Liljeros,et al.  Preferential attachment in sexual networks , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Dongqing Xie,et al.  Social influence modeling using information theory in mobile social networks , 2017, Inf. Sci..

[8]  James P. Bagrow,et al.  Natural emergence of clusters and bursts in network evolution , 2012, Physical Review X.

[9]  M E J Newman.  Assortative mixing in networks. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[10]  J. Jost,et al.  Evolving networks with distance preferences. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[11]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Scale-free characteristics of random networks: the topology of the world-wide web , 2000 .

[12]  Stefan Bornholdt,et al.  Emergence of a small world from local interactions: modeling acquaintance networks. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[13]  Gergely Palla,et al.  Preferential attachment of communities: The same principle, but a higher level , 2006 .

[14]  Hiroki Sayama,et al.  Hot-Get-Richer Network Growth Model , 2020, COMPLEX NETWORKS.

[15]  Gourab Ghoshal,et al.  Exact solutions for models of evolving networks with addition and deletion of nodes. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[16]  Mark Newman,et al.  Networks: An Introduction , 2010 .

[17]  M. Newman.  Clustering and preferential attachment in growing networks. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[18]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Error and attack tolerance of complex networks , 2000, Nature.

[19]  Lev Muchnik,et al.  Identifying influential spreaders in complex networks , 2010, 1001.5285.

[20]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Microscopic evolution of social networks , 2008, KDD.

[21]  L. Freeman.  Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[22]  Ying Fan,et al.  Do scientists trace hot topics? , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[23]  Z. Neda,et al.  Measuring preferential attachment in evolving networks , 2001, cond-mat/0104131.

[24]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[25]  Paul J. Laurienti,et al.  A New Measure of Centrality for Brain Networks , 2010, PloS one.

[26]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  The simultaneous evolution of author and paper networks , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Donald F. Towsley,et al.  Nonstandard regular variation of in-degree and out-degree in the preferential attachment model , 2014, Journal of Applied Probability.

[28]  Ying Fan,et al.  Modelling weighted networks using connection count , 2006 .

[29]  T. Vicsek,et al.  Community structure and ethnic preferences in school friendship networks , 2006, physics/0611268.

[30]  Stefan Thurner,et al.  Triadic closure dynamics drives scaling laws in social multiplex networks , 2013, 1301.0259.

[31]  Leo Katz,et al.  A new status index derived from sociometric analysis , 1953 .

[32]  Marián Boguñá,et al.  Clustering in complex networks. II. Percolation properties. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[33]  A. Vázquez.  Growing network with local rules: preferential attachment, clustering hierarchy, and degree correlations. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[34]  Marián Boguñá,et al.  Emergence of Soft Communities from Geometric Preferential Attachment , 2015, Scientific Reports.