Complements and competitors: Examining technological co-diffusion and relatedness on a collaborative coding platform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diffusive and contagious processes spread in the context of one another in connected populations. Diffusions may be more likely to pass through portions of a network where compatible diffusions are already present. We examine this by incorporating the concept of "relatedness" from the economic complexity literature into a network co-diffusion model. Building on the "product space" concept used in this work, we consider technologies themselves as nodes in "product networks," where edges define relationships between products. Specifically, coding languages on GitHub, an online platform for collaborative coding, are considered. From rates of language co-occurrence in coding projects, we calculate rates of functional cohesion and functional equivalence for each pair of languages. From rates of how individuals adopt and abandon coding languages over time, we calculate measures of complementary diffusion and substitutive diffusion for each pair of languages relative to one another. Consistent with the principle of relatedness, network regression techniques (MR-QAP) reveal strong evidence that functional cohesion positively predicts complementary diffusion. We also find limited evidence that functional equivalence predicts substitutive (competitive) diffusion. Results support the broader finding that functional dependencies between diffusive processes will dictate how said processes spread relative to one another across a population of potential adopters.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".