Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Village 1
Data from Entwistle et al
Help With the Rice Harvest
Which
village
is more
likely to
survive?
Village 2
Data from Entwistle et al
Average Degree
1
• Average number of
8
• Is same as
6
density*(n-1), where n
10
Density 0.47
is size of network 2
Avg Deg 4
– Density is just
10
4
18
2 19
17
– divide by max
6
29
27
3
possible
9
8
28 15
26
than density
20
14 22
16 30
13
11
Density 0.14
Avg Deg 4
23
Average Distance
• Average geodesic distance between all
pairs of nodes
Diameter = 3 Diameter = 3
Fragmentation Measures
• Component ratio
• F measure of fragmentation
• Distance-weighted fragmentation DF
Component Ratio
• No. of components divided by number of
nodes S4
I3
S2
W8
S1
W9
W7
W2
W4
W5
W6
W1
I1
W3
∑ s (sk k − 1)
F = 1− k
n(n − 1)
S1
W9
W7
W2
W4
W5
W6
W1
I1
W3
Heterogeneity/Concentration
• Sum of squared proportion of nodes falling in
each component, where sk gives size of kth
component: 2
⎛ sk ⎞
H = 1− ∑⎜ ⎟
k ⎝ n ⎠
W8
S2
Heterogeneity = 0.255
S1
W9
W7
W2
W4
W5
W6
W1
I1
W3
Distance-Weighted Fragmentation
• Use average of the reciprocal of distance
– letting 1/∞ = 0
1
2∑
i > j d ij
D
F = 1−
n( n − 1)
• Bounds
– lower bound of 0 when every pair is adjacent to every
other (entire network is a clique)
– upper bound of 1 when graph is all isolates
Connectivity
• Line connectivity λ is • Node connectivity κ is
the minimum number minimum number of
of lines that must be nodes that must be
removed to discon- removed to discon-
nect network nect network
T
S
Core/Periphery Structures
C/P struct.
• Does the network consist
of a single group (a core)
together with hangers-on
(a periphery), or
• are there multiple sub-
groups, each with their
own peripheries?
Clique
struct.
Kinds of CP/Models
• Partitions vs. subgraphs
– just as in cohesive subgroups
• Discrete vs. continuous
– classes, or
– coreness
A Core/Periphery Structure
Blocked/Permuted
Adjacency Matrix
CORE PERIPHERY
- 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
1 - 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
CORE 1 1 - 1 0 0 0 1 1 0
1 1 1 - 1 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 0 1 - 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0
PERIPHERY 0 1 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 - 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 - 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 -
• Core-core is 1-block
• Core-periphery are (imperfect) 1-blocks
• Periphery-periphery is 0-block
Idealized Blockmodel
CORE PERIPHERY
- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
CORE 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 - 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 - 0 0 0 0
PERIPHERY 1 1 1 1 0 0 - 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 - 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 - 0
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 -
ρ = ∑
i, j
a ij δ ij
C - 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
o 1 - 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
r 1 1 - 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
e 1 1 1 - 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 - 0 0 0 0 0
P 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0
e 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0
r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0
i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -
Alternative Images
Core Periphery
C - 1 1 1 1 - - - - -
o 1 - 1 1 1 - - - - -
r 1 1 - 1 1 - - - - -
e 1 1 1 - 1 - - - - -
1 1 1 1 - - - - - -
P - - - - - - 0 0 0 0
e - - - - - 0 - 0 0 0
r - - - - - 0 0 - 0 0
I - - - - - 0 0 0 - 0
- - - - - 0 0 0 0 -
Continuous Model
• Xij ~ CiCj
– Strength or probability of tie between node i
and node j is function of product of coreness
of each
– Central players are connected to each other
– Peripheral players are connected only to core
Dim 2
┌───────────┴───────────┴───────────┴───────────┴───────────┴─────────┐
│ │
│ │
│ │
1.85 ┤ ├
│ │
│ │
│ 0 │
│ │
│ │
│ │
1.04 ┤ ├
│ │
│ │
│ 1 │
│ 1 │
│ │
│ 0 │
0.23 ┤ 1 3 ├
│ │
│ 2 18 3 2 │
│ 6 3 │
│ 3 3 │
│ 2 │
│ 0 │
-0.57 ┤ 1 ├
│ │
│ │
│ 1 │
│ │
│ │
│ │
-1.38 ┤ ├
│ │
│ │
│ 0 │
│ │
│ │
│ │
└───────────┬───────────┬───────────┬───────────┬───────────┬─────────┘
-1.39 -0.63 0.12 0.88 1.64
Dim 1
Figure 4. MDS of core/perip
CP Structures & Morale
50
45
Study by Jeff Johnson of a South
Pole scientific team over 8 months
40
30
25
Group Morale
20
15
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Month
Centralization
• Degree to which network revolves around
a single node
Carter admin.
Year 1
Transitivity
• Proportion of triples with 3 ties as a
proportion of triples with 2 or more ties
– Aka the clustering coefficient
B
C {C,T,E} is a
T transitive triple,
but {B,C,D} is not.
D {A,D,T} is not
A E counted at all.
cc = 12/26 = 46.15%
Dyadic Cohesion
• Adjacency Average is density
– Strength of tie
• Distance
– Length of shortest path between two nodes
• Multiplexity
– Number of ties of different relations linking
two nodes
• Number of paths linking two nodes
Classifying Cohesion
Cohesion
Distance Frequency
- Length of paths - Number of paths
Adjacency connectivity
density