Generating preferential attachment graphs via a Pólya urn with expanding colors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We introduce a novel preferential attachment model using the draw variables of a modified Pólya urn with an expanding number of colors, notably capable of modeling influential opinions (in terms of vertices of high degree) as the graph evolves. Similar to the Barabási-Albert model, the generated graph grows in size by one vertex at each time instance; in contrast however, each vertex of the graph is uniquely characterized by a color, which is represented by a ball color in the Pólya urn. More specifically at each time step, we draw a ball from the urn and return it to the urn along with a number of reinforcing balls of the same color; we also add another ball of a new color to the urn. We then construct an edge between the new vertex (corresponding to the new color) and the existing vertex whose color ball is drawn. Using color-coded vertices in conjunction with the time-varying reinforcing parameter allows for vertices added (born) later in the process to potentially attain a high degree in a way that is not captured in the Barabási-Albert model. We study the degree count of the vertices by analyzing the draw vectors of the underlying stochastic process. In particular, we establish the probability distribution of the random variable counting the number of draws of a given color which determines the degree of the vertex corresponding to that color in the graph. We further provide simulation results presenting a comparison between our model and the Barabási-Albert network.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".