Networks never rest: An investigation of network evolution in three species of animals

Abstract Despite considerable advancement in the study of network evolution, three basic limitations are common to the data collected: (1) examining a small number of networks, (2) not observing networks from scratch, (3) not collecting time-stamped, continuous records of all interactions among all members of groups. Here, we avoid these limitations by observing all aggressive interactions leading to network formation from the moment of introduction among all members of 45 groups of four individuals each in three species of animals: chickens, cichlid fish, and mice. We apply several recently developed methods for the visualization and analysis of network evolution to these unique datasets. We discover, first, that network evolution is a remarkably dynamic process across all three species: networks do not evolve to specific structures and then remain in those configurations. Instead, we find dynamic stability in which many groups continually return to a general class of structures. Second, we find considerable similarity across species in the pathways that the groups take through different possible network configurations as they evolve. Third, we show that transitive component triads are more stable than intransitive ones. Fourth, we track the evolution of individual ranks within groups and discover that many individuals do not have stable positions. Finally, we discuss fundamental questions that our findings raise for the study of networks in both animals and humans.

[1]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations , 2001, cond-mat/0104162.

[2]  Kristin Branson,et al.  Distinguishing seemingly indistinguishable animals with computer vision , 2014, Nature Methods.

[3]  Louise Ryan,et al.  Changing times: Migrants' social network analysis and the challenges of longitudinal research , 2017, Soc. Networks.

[4]  Wonjoon Kim,et al.  Understanding the process of social network evolution: Online-offline integrated analysis of social tie formation , 2017, PloS one.

[5]  W. B. Lindquist,et al.  The Fragility of Individual-Based Explanations of Social Hierarchies: A Test Using Animal Pecking Orders , 2016, PloS one.

[6]  A. Bond,et al.  Social complexity and transitive inference in corvids , 2003, Animal Behaviour.

[7]  ritch c. savin-williams.  Dominance hierarchies in groups of middle to late adolescent males , 1980, Journal of youth and adolescence.

[8]  Dawn Iacobucci,et al.  Sequential social network data , 1988 .

[9]  Maureen T. Hallinan,et al.  The Formation of Intransitive Friendships , 1990 .

[10]  J. Coleman.  The Adolescent Society , 1961 .

[11]  John Skvoretz,et al.  Social structure, networks, and E‐state structuralism models , 1996 .

[12]  Rui F. Oliveira,et al.  Fighting zebrafish: characterization of aggressive behavior and winner-loser effects. , 2011, Zebrafish.

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

[14]  Kwan-Liu Ma,et al.  Visualization techniques for categorical analysis of social networks with multiple edge sets , 2014, Soc. Networks.

[15]  R. Pique-Regi,et al.  Social status alters immune regulation and response to infection in macaques , 2016, Science.

[16]  Patrick Doreian.  Actor network utilities and network evolution , 2006, Soc. Networks.

[17]  Alain Barrat,et al.  Social network dynamics of face-to-face interactions , 2011, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[18]  T. Newcomb.  The acquaintance process , 1961 .

[19]  Guillermo Paz-y-Miño C,et al.  Pinyon jays use transitive inference to predict social dominance , 2004, Nature.

[20]  I. Chase,et al.  Music notation: a new method for visualizing social interaction in animals and humans , 2006, Frontiers in Zoology.

[21]  Jenny Tung,et al.  Self-organizing dominance hierarchies in a wild primate population , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  Han de Vries,et al.  David's score: a more appropriate dominance ranking method than Clutton-Brock et al.'s index , 2003, Animal Behaviour.

[23]  Jeff A. Bilmes,et al.  Inferring colocation and conversation networks from privacy-sensitive audio with implications for computational social science , 2011, TIST.

[24]  M. Hallinan.  The process of friendship formation , 1978 .

[25]  Tim Landgraf,et al.  BioTracker: An Open-Source Computer Vision Framework for Visual Animal Tracking , 2018, ArXiv.

[26]  S. Leinhardt.  The development of transitive structure in children's interpersonal relations , 1973 .

[27]  Nicholas C. Wormald,et al.  The evolution and structure of social networks , 2014, Network Science.

[28]  John Skvoretz,et al.  Relations, Species, and Network Structure , 2002, J. Soc. Struct..

[29]  M. Taborsky,et al.  What sets the odds of winning and losing? , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[30]  H. A. David.  Ranking from unbalanced paired-comparison data , 1987 .

[31]  M. Jennions,et al.  Does the winner–loser effect determine male mating success? , 2018, Biology Letters.

[32]  H. Würbel,et al.  Phenotypic variability between Social Dominance Ranks in laboratory mice , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[33]  Logan Grosenick,et al.  Fish can infer social rank by observation alone , 2007, Nature.

[34]  Daniel A. McFarland,et al.  Dynamic Network Visualization1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

[35]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  On the evolution of user interaction in Facebook , 2009, WOSN '09.

[36]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  No Longer Discrete: Modeling the Dynamics of Social Networks and Continuous Behavior , 2019, Sociological Methodology.

[37]  C. Marler,et al.  Winning fights elevates testosterone levels in California mice and enhances future ability to win fights , 2005, Hormones and Behavior.

[38]  I. J. Pinter,et al.  Novel approach to automatically classify rat social behavior using a video tracking system , 2016, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[39]  W. Brent Lindquist,et al.  Data-Based Analysis of Winner-Loser Models of Hierarchy Formation in Animals , 2009, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[40]  Weiwei Gu,et al.  Exploring Small-World Network with an Elite-Clique: Bringing Embeddedness Theory into the Dynamic Evolution of a Venture Capital Network , 2018, Soc. Networks.

[41]  N. Christakis,et al.  Social network targeting to maximise population behaviour change: a cluster randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[42]  Rui F. Oliveira,et al.  On the (in)stability of dominance hierarchies in the cichlid fish Oreochromis mossambicus , 1996 .

[43]  Dominance Hierarchies , 2021, Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science.

[44]  Klaus Mueller,et al.  PeckVis: A Visual Analytics Tool to Analyze Dominance Hierarchies in Small Groups , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[45]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Group formation in large social networks: membership, growth, and evolution , 2006, KDD '06.

[46]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Uncovering the role of elementary processes in network evolution , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[47]  J. Beehner,et al.  The next step for stress research in primates: To identify relationships between glucocorticoid secretion and fitness , 2017, Hormones and Behavior.

[48]  R. Fernald,et al.  Social status regulates growth rate: consequences for life-history strategies. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[49]  J. Curley,et al.  Social context-dependent relationships between mouse dominance rank and plasma hormone levels , 2017, Physiology & Behavior.

[50]  Gueorgi Kossinets,et al.  Empirical Analysis of an Evolving Social Network , 2006, Science.

[51]  Carla Fernandes,et al.  Network dynamics of affiliative ties in preschool peer groups , 2019, Soc. Networks.

[52]  David B. McDonald,et al.  A social network perspective on measurements of dominance hierarchies , 2012, Animal Behaviour.

[53]  Eli D. Strauss,et al.  Aggression and dominance: an interdisciplinary overview , 2016, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences.

[54]  Christian Steglich,et al.  Beyond dyadic interdependence: Actor-oriented models for co-evolving social networks and individual behaviors , 2007 .

[55]  Ulrik Brandes,et al.  Longitudinal analysis of personal networks. The case of Argentinean migrants in Spain , 2010, Soc. Networks.

[56]  I. Chase,et al.  DYNAMICS OF HIERARCHY FORMATION: THE SEQUENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF DOMINANCE RELATIONSHIPS , 1982 .

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

[58]  Lori Rosenkopf,et al.  Investigating the Microstructure of Network Evolution: Alliance Formation in the Mobile Communications Industry , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[59]  Edward R. Tufte,et al.  Envisioning Information , 1990 .

[60]  Craig Tovey,et al.  Individual differences versus social dynamics in the formation of animal dominance hierarchies , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[61]  Ivan D. Chase,et al.  Two methods for quantifying the development of dominance hierarchies in large groups with applications to Harris' sparrows , 1987, Animal Behaviour.

[62]  Thomas W. Valente,et al.  Using Visualizations to Explore Network Dynamics , 2013, J. Soc. Struct..

[63]  Neir Eshel,et al.  Simple Behavioral Analysis (SimBA) – an open source toolkit for computer classification of complex social behaviors in experimental animals , 2020, bioRxiv.

[64]  John M. Light,et al.  Fundamental principles of network formation among preschool children , 2010, Soc. Networks.

[65]  Daniel A. McFarland,et al.  The Art and Science of Dynamic Network Visualization , 2006, J. Soc. Struct..

[66]  I. Chase,et al.  Self-structuring properties of dominance hierarchies a new perspective. , 2011, Advances in genetics.

[67]  Maureen T. Hallinan,et al.  The structure of positive sentiment , 1974 .

[68]  P. Pattison,et al.  Random graph models for temporal processes in social networks , 2001 .

[69]  J. Koolhaas,et al.  Trait aggressiveness does not predict social dominance of rats in the Visible Burrow System , 2017, Physiology & Behavior.

[70]  D. Garlaschelli,et al.  Structure and evolution of the world trade network , 2005, physics/0502066.

[71]  B. Franks,et al.  Mouse Social Network Dynamics and Community Structure are Associated with Plasticity-Related Brain Gene Expression , 2016, Front. Behav. Neurosci..

[72]  J. Skvoretz,et al.  Status and Interaction , 2016 .

[73]  H. A. David,et al.  The method of paired comparisons , 1966 .

[74]  David Krackhardt,et al.  Heider vs Simmel: Emergent Features in Dynamic Structures , 2006, SNA@ICML.

[75]  M. Hallinan,et al.  A Stochastic Model for Change in Group Structure , 1976 .

[76]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Network Dynamics * , 2011 .

[77]  Scott D. Gest,et al.  Effects of PROSPER on the influence potential of prosocial versus antisocial youth in adolescent friendship networks. , 2013, The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.

[78]  Antje Engelhardt,et al.  Assessing dominance hierarchies: validation and advantages of progressive evaluation with Elo-rating , 2011, Animal Behaviour.

[79]  Won Lee,et al.  Temporal dynamics of social hierarchy formation and maintenance in male mice , 2016, Animal Behaviour.