The Navigability of strong ties: small worlds, tie strength, and network topology

A small world (SW) is a (large) graph with both local clustering and, on average, short distances between nodes [1,2]. Short distances promote accessibility, whereas local clustering and redundancy of edges, as some research suggests [3,4], promotes robustness to disconnection and, through multiple independent pathways, reliable accessibility as well. For paths to transmit materials and information via network traversal, a small world also requires navigability. This was the property investigated in the first small world experiment by Travers and Milgram [5]: Could people randomly selected in Omaha, Nebraska, successfully send letters to a predetermined target in Boston, when asked to direct their letters to single acquaintances who are asked in turn to forward the letters through what becomes a chain of personal acquaintances? In many cases this task was accomplished in fewer than six steps, but success required letters sent to acquaintances who were successively closer, geographically or occupationally, to the target. The problem of navigability is whether the next step in such chains will be any closer to the target than the last. This cannot occur in a network of edges generated with uniform probabilities, as Kleinberg showed [6]. SW networks with random rewiring, like random networks generally, lack the ability to find the target person quickly via successive links in the network. Kleinberg also showed a far stronger result: the ability of decentralized algorithms to find short paths by sending messages along their incident edges using only local information about them depends, in regular lattices in which edge probability is an inverse power of lattice distance, on a unique value of that exactly matches the dimensionality of the lattice. The short paths that are relevant in this context are those whose lengths are bounded by a polynomial in logN, where N is the number of nodes, because this is what defines algorithmic efficiency for a random graph [7]. The right power-law decay of link frequency—in relation to geometric distance— creates fewer long jumps in the right direction that act as shortcuts

[1]  D. R. White,et al.  Network Mediation of Exchange Structures: Ambilateral Sidedness and Property Flows in Pul Eliya, Sri Lanka , 1998 .

[2]  Frank Harary,et al.  Graph Theory , 2016 .

[3]  Scott A. Boorman,et al.  The Genetics of Altruism , 1981 .

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

[5]  Michael Houseman,et al.  Structures réticulaires de la pratique matrimoniale , 1996 .

[6]  Martin Suter,et al.  Small World , 2002 .

[7]  Robin I. M. Dunbar Despotism and Differential Reproduction. A Darwinian View of History, Laura L. Betzig. Aldine, New York (1986), xi, + 171. Price DM 89 , 1987 .

[8]  E. Castro From the Enemy's Point of View: Humanity and Divinity in an Amazonian Society , 1992 .

[9]  Richard E. Michod,et al.  The Genetics of Altruism, Scott A. Boorman, Paul R. Levit. Academic Press, New York (1980), xx, +459. Price $29.50 , 1982 .

[10]  White Structural Endogamy and the graph de parenté , 1997 .

[11]  R. Berndt,et al.  A world that was : the Yaraldi of the Murray River and the lakes, South Australia , 1993 .

[12]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  A subquadratic triad census algorithm for large sparse networks with small maximum degree , 2001, Soc. Networks.

[13]  D. R. White Structural endogamy and the network graphe de parenté , 1997 .

[14]  Gordon White,et al.  Network Analysis and Ethnographic Problems: Process Models of a Turkish Nomad Clan , 2004 .

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

[16]  Joao Antonio Pereira,et al.  Linked: The new science of networks , 2002 .

[17]  Janet Gouldner Opening remarks: Alvin Gouldner's Theory and Society , 1996 .

[18]  M E J Newman,et al.  Identity and Search in Social Networks , 2002, Science.

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

[20]  Michel Grossetti,et al.  Markets from Networks. Socioeconomic Models of Production , 2003 .

[21]  Susanna C. Manrubia,et al.  STATISTICAL PROPERTIES OF GENEALOGICAL TREES , 1999, cond-mat/9902033.

[22]  Douglas R. White,et al.  Class, property, and structural endogamy: Visualizing networked histories , 1997 .

[23]  D. R. White,et al.  Taking Sides: Marriage networks and Dravidian Kinship in Lowland South America , 1998 .

[24]  L. Barry Les modes de composition de l'alliance. Le "mariage arabe" , 1998 .

[25]  A. Korotayev,et al.  Parallel-cousin (FBD) marriage, islamization, and arabization , 2000 .

[26]  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.

[27]  Tang,et al.  Self-Organized Criticality: An Explanation of 1/f Noise , 2011 .

[28]  A. Rapoport Contribution to the theory of random and biased nets , 1957 .

[29]  Jean-Pierre Eckmann,et al.  Curvature of co-links uncovers hidden thematic layers in the World Wide Web , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[30]  W. Denham,et al.  Aranda and Alyawara kinship: a quantitative argument for a double helix model , 1979 .

[31]  F. Héritier L'exercice de la parenté , 1982 .

[32]  Paul Memmott,et al.  Humpy, house and tin shed: Aboriginal settlement history on the Darling River , 1991 .

[33]  F. Harary,et al.  The cohesiveness of blocks in social networks: Node connectivity and conditional density , 2001 .

[34]  L. Barry Les modes de composition de l'alliance: Le mariage arabe : Alliances, rites et mythes , 1998 .

[35]  Stanley Milgram,et al.  An Experimental Study of the Small World Problem , 1969 .

[36]  Lada A. Adamic The Small World Web , 1999, ECDL.

[37]  Robert V. Kemper,et al.  Chronicling cultures : long-term field research in anthropology , 2002 .

[38]  Derek de Solla Price,et al.  A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes , 1976, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[39]  D J PRICE,et al.  NETWORKS OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS. , 1965, Science.

[40]  M. Houseman Marriage Networks among Australian Aboriginal Populations , 1997 .

[41]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Book Review: Small Worlds. The Dynamics of Networks Between Order and Randomness , 2000 .

[42]  Frank Harary,et al.  What is a System , 1981 .

[43]  P. Pattison,et al.  Composing a civic arena: Publics, projects, and social settings☆ , 2000 .

[44]  A. R. Smith,et al.  Stochastic Models for Social Processes. , 1968 .

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

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

[47]  P. Killworth,et al.  The reversal small-world experiment , 1978 .

[48]  David Knoke,et al.  The Structure of Corporate Political Action: Interfirm Relations and Their Consequences.By Mark S. Mizruchi. Harvard University Press, 1992. 310 pp. $37.50 , 1994 .

[49]  Jie Wu,et al.  Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks between Order and Randomness , 2003 .

[50]  D. R. White,et al.  Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups , 2003 .

[51]  D. Watts The “New” Science of Networks , 2004 .

[52]  P. Killworth,et al.  Studying social relations cross-culturally , 1988 .

[53]  D. Watts,et al.  Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks between Order and Randomness , 2001 .

[54]  A. Rbnyi ON THE EVOLUTION OF RANDOM GRAPHS , 2001 .