ESTIMATION OF CONTROL ENERGY AND CONTROL STRATEGIES FOR COMPLEX NETWORKS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The controlling of complex networks is one of the most challenging problems in modern network science. Accordingly, the required energy cost of control is a fundamental and significant problem. In this paper, we present the theoretical analysis and numerical simulations to study the controllability of complex networks from the energy perspective. First, by combining theoretical derivation and numerical simulations, we obtain lower bounds of the maximal and minimal energy costs for an arbitrary normal network, which are related to the eigenvalues of the state transition matrix. Second, we deduce that controlling unstable normal networks is easier than controlling stable normal networks with the same size. Third, we demonstrate a tradeoff between the control energy and the average degree (or the maximum degree) of an arbitrary undirected network. Fourth, numerical simulations show that the energy cost is negatively correlated with the degree of nodes. Moreover, the combinations of control nodes with the greater sum of degree need less energy to implement complete control. Finally, we propose a multi-objective optimization model to obtain the control strategy, which not only ensures the fewer control nodes but also guarantees the less energy cost of control.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".