MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402832324 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2403682121

Distribution of centrality measures on undirected random networks via the cavity method

2024· article· en· W4402832324 on OpenAlexaff
Silvia Bartolucci, Fabio Caccioli, Francesco Caravelli, Pierpaolo Vivo

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOpinion Dynamics and Social Influence
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilLos Alamos National LaboratoryNational Nuclear Security AdministrationUK Research and InnovationLaboratory Directed Research and DevelopmentU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsCentralityUndirected graphDistribution (mathematics)Statistical physicsMathematicsBiological systemComputer scienceMathematical optimizationPhysicsCombinatoricsMathematical analysisBiologyGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Katz centrality of a node in a complex network is a measure of the node's importance as far as the flow of information across the network is concerned. For ensembles of locally tree-like undirected random graphs, this observable is a random variable. Its full probability distribution is of interest but difficult to handle analytically because of its "global" character and its definition in terms of a matrix inverse. Leveraging a fast Gaussian Belief Propagation-Cavity algorithm to solve linear systems on tree-like structures, we show that i) the Katz centrality of a single instance can be computed recursively in a very fast way, and ii) the probability [Formula: see text] that a random node in the ensemble of undirected random graphs has centrality [Formula: see text] satisfies a set of recursive distributional equations, which can be analytically characterized and efficiently solved using a population dynamics algorithm. We test our solution on ensembles of Erdős-Rényi and Scale Free networks in the locally tree-like regime, with excellent agreement. The analytical distribution of centrality for the configuration model conditioned on the degree of each node can be employed as a benchmark to identify nodes of empirical networks with over- and underexpressed centrality relative to a null baseline. We also provide an approximate formula based on a rank-[Formula: see text] projection that works well if the network is not too sparse, and we argue that an extension of our method could be efficiently extended to tackle analytical distributions of other centrality measures such as PageRank for directed networks in a transparent and user-friendly way.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicOpinion Dynamics and Social InfluenceFrench-language works237,207