Topology and spectral interconnectivities of higher-order multilayer networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multilayer networks have permeated all areas of science as an abstraction for interdependent heterogeneous complex systems. However, describing such systems through a purely graph-theoretic formalism presupposes that the interactions that define the underlying infrastructures are only pairwise-based, a strong assumption likely leading to oversimplification. Most interdependent systems intrinsically involve higher-order intra- and inter-layer interactions. For instance, ecological systems involve interactions among groups within and in-between species, collaborations and citations link teams of coauthors to articles and vice versa, and interactions might exist among groups of friends from different social networks. Although higher-order interactions have been studied for monolayer systems through the language of simplicial complexes and hypergraphs, a systematic formalism incorporating them into the realm of multilayer systems is still lacking. Here, we introduce the concept of crossimplicial multicomplexes as a general formalism for modeling interdependent systems involving higher-order intra- and inter-layer connections. Subsequently, we introduce cross-homology and its spectral counterpart, the cross-Laplacian operators, to establish a rigorous mathematical framework for quantifying global and local intra- and inter-layer topological structures in such systems. Using synthetic and empirical datasets, we show that the spectra of the cross-Laplacians of a multilayer network detect different types of clusters in one layer that are controlled by hubs in another layer. We call such hubs spectral cross-hubs and define spectral persistence as a way to rank them, according to their emergence along the spectra. Our framework is broad and can especially be used to study structural and functional connectomes combining connectivities of different types and orders.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".