Social Centralization and Semantic Collapse: Hyperbolic Embeddings of Networks and Text

Modern advances in transportation and communication technology from airplanes to the internet alongside global expansions of media, migration, and trade have made the modern world more connected than ever before. But what does this bode for the convergence of global culture? Here we explore the relationship between centralization in social networks and contraction or collapse in the diversity of semantic expressions such as ideas, opinions, and tastes. We advance formal examination of this relationship by introducing new methods of manifold learning that allow us to map social networks and semantic combinations into comparable hyperbolic spaces. Hyperbolic representations natively represent both hierarchy and diversity within a system. We illustrate this method by examining the relationship between social centralization and semantic diversity within 21st Century physics, empirically demonstrating how dense, centralized collaboration is associated with a reduction in the space of ideas and how these patterns generalize to all modern scholarship and science. We discuss the complex of causes underlying this association, and theorize the dynamic interplay between structural centralization and semantic contraction, arguing that it introduces an essential tension between the supply and demand of difference.

[1]  S. Asch Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. , 1956 .

[2]  Douwe Kiela,et al.  Poincaré Embeddings for Learning Hierarchical Representations , 2017, NIPS.

[3]  Rachna,et al.  Sapiens: A brief history of humankind , 2017 .

[4]  Wilson C. K. Poon,et al.  TOPICAL REVIEW: The physics of a model colloid-polymer mixture , 2002 .

[5]  Edmund A. Mennis The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies, and Nations , 2006 .

[6]  T. Dupont,et al.  Capillary flow as the cause of ring stains from dried liquid drops , 1997, Nature.

[7]  James Surowiecki The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations Doubleday Books. , 2004 .

[8]  Kathleen M. Carley An approach for relating social structure to cognitive structure , 1986 .

[9]  Damon Centola,et al.  Network dynamics of social influence in the wisdom of crowds , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  K. Knorr-Cetina,et al.  Epistemic cultures : how the sciences make knowledge , 1999 .

[11]  Marion Fourcade,et al.  The Superiority of Economists , 2015 .

[12]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

[13]  Adam Tauman Kalai,et al.  Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddings , 2016, NIPS.

[14]  Andrei Z. Broder,et al.  Anatomy of the long tail: ordinary people with extraordinary tastes , 2010, WSDM '10.

[15]  Lu Hong,et al.  Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Priscilla S. Markwood,et al.  The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More , 2006 .

[17]  K. K. Cetina Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge , 1999 .

[18]  Thomas Vogt,et al.  Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science , 2012 .

[19]  Feng Shi,et al.  The wisdom of polarized crowds , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[20]  Todd Miner Book Review: The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter than the Few, and how Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies, and Nations , 2005 .

[21]  H. Jaeger,et al.  Physics of the Granular State , 1992, Science.

[22]  J. Mohr Introduction: Structures, institutions, and cultural analysis , 2000 .

[23]  S. Page The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies , 2007 .

[24]  Matthew J. Salganik,et al.  Leading the Herd Astray: An Experimental Study of Self-fulfilling Prophecies in an Artificial Cultural Market , 2008, Social psychology quarterly.

[25]  Jeffrey Pennington,et al.  GloVe: Global Vectors for Word Representation , 2014, EMNLP.

[26]  Luis Garicano,et al.  Hierarchies and the Organization of Knowledge in Production , 2000, Journal of Political Economy.

[27]  S. Feld Why Your Friends Have More Friends Than You Do , 1991, American Journal of Sociology.

[28]  R. Breiger,et al.  Cultural Holes: Beyond Relationality in Social Networks and Culture , 2010 .

[29]  Steven Skiena,et al.  DeepWalk: online learning of social representations , 2014, KDD.

[30]  R. Burt Structural Holes and Good Ideas1 , 2004, American Journal of Sociology.

[31]  P. Lazarsfeld,et al.  Friendship as Social process: a substantive and methodological analysis , 1964 .

[32]  Kevin Lewis,et al.  The Conversion of Cultural Tastes into Social Network Ties1 , 2018, American Journal of Sociology.

[33]  Richard A. Harshman,et al.  Information Retrieval using a Singular Value Decomposition Model of Latent Semantic Structure , 1988, SIGIR Forum.

[34]  Wiebe E. Bijker,et al.  Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[35]  D. Stark,et al.  Game Changer: The Topology of Creativity1 , 2015, American Journal of Sociology.

[36]  Kathleen M. Carley A Theory of Group Stability , 1991 .

[37]  D. Helbing,et al.  Growth, innovation, scaling, and the pace of life in cities , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[38]  Anita Elberse Should You Invest in the Long Tail , 2008 .

[39]  J. M. Kittross The measurement of meaning , 1959 .

[40]  Amin Vahdat,et al.  Hyperbolic Geometry of Complex Networks , 2010, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[41]  Johanne Saint-Charles,et al.  Different relationships for coping with ambiguity and uncertainty in organizations , 2009, Soc. Networks.

[42]  Marián Boguñá,et al.  Network Cosmology , 2012, Scientific Reports.

[43]  D. Kandel Homophily, Selection, and Socialization in Adolescent Friendships , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[44]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Echoes of power: language effects and power differences in social interaction , 2011, WWW.

[45]  H. D. Young,et al.  University Physics with Modern Physics Technology Update , 2013 .

[46]  J. R. Firth,et al.  A Synopsis of Linguistic Theory, 1930-1955 , 1957 .

[47]  Jeffrey Dean,et al.  Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionality , 2013, NIPS.

[48]  P. Murray COLLABORATION AND CREATIVITY , 2004 .

[49]  W. B. Johnson,et al.  Extensions of Lipschitz mappings into Hilbert space , 1984 .

[50]  H. Simon,et al.  ON A CLASS OF SKEW DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS , 1955 .

[51]  Marvin D. Krohn,et al.  The Web of Conformity: A Network Approach to the Explanation of Delinquent Behavior , 1986 .

[52]  Daniel Jurafsky,et al.  Word embeddings quantify 100 years of gender and ethnic stereotypes , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[53]  John T. Jost,et al.  What makes you think you're so popular? Self-evaluation maintenance and the subjective side of the "friendship paradox" , 2001 .

[54]  Thomas W. Valente Network models of the diffusion of innovations , 1996, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[55]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Quantifying social group evolution , 2007, Nature.

[56]  John Levi Martin,et al.  A formal approach to meaning , 2018 .

[57]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[58]  J. Brennecke,et al.  Duality beyond Dyads: Multiplex patterning of social ties and cultural meanings , 2017 .

[59]  Marc Peter Deisenroth,et al.  Neural Embeddings of Graphs in Hyperbolic Space , 2017, ArXiv.

[60]  A. van de Rijt,et al.  Dynamics of Networks if Everyone Strives for Structural Holes1 , 2008, American Journal of Sociology.

[61]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[62]  Aparna Joshi,et al.  The Role Of Context In Work Team Diversity Research: A Meta-Analytic Review , 2009 .

[63]  Matt Taddy,et al.  The Geometry of Culture: Analyzing the Meanings of Class through Word Embeddings , 2018, American Sociological Review.

[64]  Arvind Narayanan,et al.  Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases , 2016, Science.

[65]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Mutual redundancies in interhuman communication systems: Steps toward a calculus of processing meaning , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[66]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[67]  R. Breiger,et al.  Culture and Networks , 2015 .

[68]  Patricia E. Tweet Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital , 2006 .

[69]  K. Boudreau,et al.  'Open' Disclosure of Innovations, Incentives and Follow-on Reuse: Theory on Processes of Cumulative Innovation and a Field Experiment in Computational Biology , 2015 .

[70]  Douglas Dunham The Symmetry of “Circle Limit IV” and Related Patterns , 2009 .

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

[72]  D. Helbing,et al.  How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[74]  Roger Guimerà,et al.  Team Assembly Mechanisms Determine Collaboration Network Structure and Team Performance , 2005, Science.

[75]  S. Wasserman,et al.  Logit models and logistic regressions for social networks: I. An introduction to Markov graphs andp , 1996 .

[76]  E. Rogers,et al.  Communication of Innovations; A Cross-Cultural Approach. , 1974 .

[77]  Shuicheng Yan,et al.  Graph embedding: a general framework for dimensionality reduction , 2005, 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05).

[78]  James A. Evans,et al.  Large Teams Have Developed Science and Technology; Small Teams Have Disrupted It , 2017, ArXiv.

[79]  P. Stern Birds of a feather sing together. , 2016, Science.

[80]  Camille Roth,et al.  Social and semantic coevolution in knowledge networks , 2010, Soc. Networks.

[81]  M. Neale,et al.  What Differences Make a Difference? , 2005, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[82]  D. Meyer,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Som Text Figs. S1 to S6 References Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups , 2022 .

[83]  Dmitri V. Krioukov,et al.  Network Mapping by Replaying Hyperbolic Growth , 2012, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[84]  I. Prigogine Le rendement thermodynamique de la thermodiffusion , 1947 .

[85]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[86]  Raúl Toral,et al.  Nonequilibrium transitions in complex networks: a model of social interaction. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[87]  Henry H. Bauer,et al.  Barriers Against Interdisciplinarity: Implications for Studies of Science, Technology, and Society (STS , 1990 .

[88]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[89]  B. L. Whorf Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf , 1956 .

[90]  Balazs Vedres,et al.  Structural Folds: Generative Disruption in Overlapping Groups1 , 2010, American Journal of Sociology.

[91]  W. Myers,et al.  Atypical Combinations and Scientific Impact , 2013 .

[92]  Paul DiMaggio Classification in Art. , 1987 .

[93]  Tibor Braun,et al.  A quantitative view on the coming of age of interdisciplinarity in the sciences 1980-1999 , 2003, Scientometrics.

[94]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S3 References the Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2022 .

[95]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[96]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[97]  Daniel A. McFarland,et al.  Making the Connection: Social Bonding in Courtship Situations1 , 2013, American Journal of Sociology.

[98]  L. Fleming,et al.  Collaborative Brokerage, Generative Creativity, and Creative Success , 2007 .

[99]  L. Wittgenstein,et al.  Philosophische Untersuchungen = Philosophical investigations , 1953 .

[100]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  No country for old members: user lifecycle and linguistic change in online communities , 2013, WWW.

[101]  Gerald A. Carlino,et al.  Urban Density and the Rate of Invention , 2006 .

[102]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[103]  Marián Boguñá,et al.  Popularity versus similarity in growing networks , 2011, Nature.

[104]  Monica M. Lee,et al.  Doorway to the dharma of duality , 2018, Poetics.

[105]  D. Krackhardt,et al.  Friendship Patterns and Culture: The Control of Organizational Diversity , 1990 .

[106]  Leonard M. Freeman,et al.  A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness , 1977 .

[107]  Mooweon Rhee,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation , 2016 .

[108]  Ming-Wei Chang,et al.  BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding , 2019, NAACL.

[109]  I. Prigogine,et al.  Thermodynamique chimique : conformément aux méthodes de Gibbs et De Donder , 1944 .

[110]  Roberto Bonola,et al.  Non-Euclidean Geometry; A Critical and Historical Study of Its Development , 1913, The Mathematical Gazette.

[111]  Omar Lizardo Omnivorousness as the bridging of cultural holes: A measurement strategy , 2014, Theory and Society.