Enhancing robustness of interdependent network under recovery based on a two-layer-protection strategy

The robustness of coupled networks has attracted great attention recently, because the spread of failures from one network to its coupled network makes the coupled networks more vulnerable. Most existing achievements mainly focused on the integrity properties of coupled networks. However, failures also exist when networks are being reconstructed. Moreover, existing node-protection methods which aim to enhance the robustness of coupled networks only protect the influential nodes in one layer. In this paper, firstly, a two-layer-protection strategy is proposed to enhance the robustness of coupled networks under their reconstruction. Secondly, we adopt five strategies based on different centralities to select influential nodes, and propose a two-layer vision for each of them. Lastly, experiments on three different coupled networks show that by applying the two-layer-protection strategy, the robustness of coupled networks can be enhanced more efficiently compared with other methods which only protect nodes in one layer.

[1]  Jari Saramäki,et al.  Temporal Networks , 2011, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[2]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  Dynamical Processes on Complex Networks , 2008 .

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

[4]  Hocine Cherifi,et al.  Centrality Measures for Networks with Community Structure , 2016, ArXiv.

[5]  E A Leicht,et al.  Suppressing cascades of load in interdependent networks , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  Recovery from Malicious Transactions , 2002, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

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

[8]  Yicheng Zhang,et al.  Identifying influential nodes in complex networks , 2012 .

[9]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  The Large-Scale Structure of Semantic Networks: Statistical Analyses and a Model of Semantic Growth , 2001, Cogn. Sci..

[10]  Harry Eugene Stanley,et al.  Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks , 2009, Nature.

[11]  Dong Zhou,et al.  Percolation of interdependent networks with intersimilarity. , 2013, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[12]  Harry Eugene Stanley,et al.  Robustness of interdependent networks under targeted attack , 2010, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[13]  Maoguo Gong,et al.  Enhancing robustness of coupled networks under targeted recoveries , 2015, Scientific Reports.

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

[15]  Kemal Akkaya,et al.  Distributed Recovery from Network Partitioning in Movable Sensor/Actor Networks via Controlled Mobility , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[16]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Structure and Dynamics of Networks , 2009 .

[17]  Sergey Brin,et al.  Reprint of: The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine , 2012, Comput. Networks.

[18]  Enrico Zio,et al.  Modeling Interdependent Network Systems for Identifying Cascade-Safe Operating Margins , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Reliability.

[19]  Jian-Wei Wang,et al.  Robustness of complex networks with the local protection strategy against cascading failures , 2013 .

[20]  Ming Li,et al.  Cascading failures in coupled networks: The critical role of node-coupling strength across networks , 2016, Scientific reports.

[21]  Paul Hines,et al.  Reducing Cascading Failure Risk by Increasing Infrastructure Network Interdependence , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[22]  Yi-Cheng Zhang,et al.  Leaders in Social Networks, the Delicious Case , 2011, PloS one.

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

[24]  B. Bollobás.  The evolution of random graphs , 1984 .

[25]  Filippo Radicchi,et al.  Percolation in real interdependent networks , 2015, Nature Physics.

[26]  H E Stanley,et al.  Classes of small-world networks. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  S. Havlin,et al.  Interdependent networks: reducing the coupling strength leads to a change from a first to second order percolation transition. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[28]  Philip S. Yu,et al.  Coupled Behavior Analysis with Applications , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[29]  Hans J. Herrmann,et al.  Towards designing robust coupled networks , 2011, Scientific Reports.

[30]  Guido Caldarelli,et al.  Cascades in interdependent flow networks , 2015, ArXiv.

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

[32]  James P. Bagrow,et al.  Reducing Cascading Failure Risk by Increasing Infrastructure Network Interdependence , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[33]  Walter E. Beyeler,et al.  The topology of interbank payment flows , 2007 .

[34]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Internet: Diameter of the World-Wide Web , 1999, Nature.

[35]  Hans J. Herrmann,et al.  Mitigation of malicious attacks on networks , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al.  Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.

[37]  Sergey Brin,et al.  The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine , 1998, Comput. Networks.

[38]  Zhen Chen,et al.  Cascading failure of interdependent networks with different coupling preference under targeted attack , 2015 .

[39]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[40]  Roma,et al.  Fitness model for the Italian interbank money market. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[41]  Adilson E Motter,et al.  Cascade-based attacks on complex networks. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.