Efficiency of attack strategies on complex model and real-world networks

We investigated the efficiency of attack strategies to network nodes when targeting several complex model and real-world networks. We tested 5 attack strategies, 3 of which were introduced in this work for the first time, to attack 3 model networks (Erdos and Renyi, Barabasi and Albert preferential attachment network, and scale-free network configuration models) and 3 real networks (Gnutella peer-to-peer network, email network of the University of Rovira i Virgili, and immunoglobulin interaction network). Nodes were removed sequentially according to the importance criterion defined by the attack strategy, and we used the size of the largest connected component (LCC) as a measure of network damage. We found that the efficiency of attack strategies (fraction of nodes to be deleted for a given reduction of LCC size) depends on the topology of the network, although attacks based on either the number of connections of a node or betweenness centrality were often the most efficient strategies. Sequential deletion of nodes in decreasing order of betweenness centrality was the most efficient attack strategy when targeting real-world networks. The relative efficiency of attack strategies often changed during the sequential removal of nodes, especially for networks with power-law degree distribution.

[1]  David Gfeller,et al.  Spectral coarse graining of complex networks. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[2]  P. Erdos,et al.  On the evolution of random graphs , 1984 .

[3]  Elena Agliari,et al.  Immune networks: multi-tasking capabilities at medium load , 2013, 1302.7259.

[4]  A Díaz-Guilera,et al.  Self-similar community structure in a network of human interactions. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[5]  Ulrich Brose,et al.  Robustness to secondary extinctions: Comparing trait-based sequential deletions in static and dynamic food webs , 2011 .

[6]  S. Havlin,et al.  Breakdown of the internet under intentional attack. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[7]  Massimo Marchiori,et al.  Model for cascading failures in complex networks. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[8]  Stefano Allesina,et al.  Using food web dominator trees to catch secondary extinctions in action , 2009, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[9]  Ian T. Foster,et al.  Mapping the Gnutella Network , 2002, IEEE Internet Comput..

[10]  Sergey N. Dorogovtsev,et al.  Critical phenomena in complex networks , 2007, ArXiv.

[11]  An-Ping Zeng,et al.  The Connectivity Structure, Giant Strong Component and Centrality of Metabolic Networks , 2003, Bioinform..

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

[13]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  The Structure and Function of Complex Networks , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[14]  Ian T. Foster,et al.  Mapping the Gnutella Network: Properties of Large-Scale Peer-to-Peer Systems and Implications for System Design , 2002, ArXiv.

[15]  Elena Agliari,et al.  Multitasking associative networks. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[16]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  Immunization of complex networks. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[17]  J. Kert'esz,et al.  Failures and avalanches in complex networks , 2006, cond-mat/0605461.

[18]  Reuven Cohen,et al.  Stability and topology of scale-free networks under attack and defense strategies. , 2005, Physical review letters.

[19]  Beom Jun Kim,et al.  Attack vulnerability of complex networks. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[20]  Ricard V. Solé,et al.  Complexity and fragility in ecological networks , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  H. Stanley,et al.  Robustness of network of networks under targeted attack. , 2013, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[22]  Michele Bellingeri,et al.  Increasing the extinction risk of highly connected species causes a sharp robust-to-fragile transition in empirical food webs , 2013 .

[23]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Statistical mechanics of complex networks , 2001, ArXiv.

[24]  Michele Bellingeri,et al.  Threshold extinction in food webs , 2011, Theoretical Ecology.

[25]  A. Barra,et al.  Immune networks: multitasking capabilities near saturation , 2013, 1305.5936.

[26]  Neo D. Martinez,et al.  Network structure and biodiversity loss in food webs: robustness increases with connectance , 2002, Ecology Letters.

[27]  R. Rosenfeld Nature , 2009, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[28]  Bo Ebenman,et al.  Response of ecosystems to realistic extinction sequences. , 2011, The Journal of animal ecology.

[29]  John B. Shoven,et al.  I , Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal.

[30]  M. Barthelemy Betweenness centrality in large complex networks , 2003, cond-mat/0309436.

[31]  김삼묘,et al.  “Bioinformatics” 특집을 내면서 , 2000 .

[32]  D S Callaway,et al.  Network robustness and fragility: percolation on random graphs. , 2000, Physical review letters.