Influential groups for seeding and sustaining nonlinear contagion in heterogeneous hypergraphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Contagion phenomena are often the results of multibody interactions—such as superspreading events or social reinforcement—describable as hypergraphs. We develop an approximate master equation framework to study contagions on hypergraphs with a heterogeneous structure in terms of group size (hyperedge cardinality) and of node membership (hyperdegree). By mapping multibody interactions to nonlinear infection rates, we demonstrate the influence of large groups in two ways. First, we characterize the phase transition, which can be continuous or discontinuous with a bistable regime. Our analytical expressions for the critical and tricritical points highlight the influence of the first three moments of the membership distribution. We also show that heterogeneous group sizes and nonlinear contagion promote a mesoscopic localization regime where contagion is sustained by the largest groups, thereby inhibiting bistability. Second, we formulate an optimal seeding problem for hypergraph contagion and compare two strategies: allocating seeds according to node or group properties. We find that, when the contagion is sufficiently nonlinear, groups are more effective seeds than individual hubs.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".