38,392 research outputs found
Detecting Core-Periphery Structures by Surprise
Detecting the presence of mesoscale structures in complex networks is of
primary importance. This is especially true for financial networks, whose
structural organization deeply affects their resilience to events like default
cascades, shocks propagation, etc. Several methods have been proposed, so far,
to detect communities, i.e. groups of nodes whose connectivity is significantly
large. Communities, however do not represent the only kind of mesoscale
structures characterizing real-world networks: other examples are provided by
bow-tie structures, core-periphery structures and bipartite structures. Here we
propose a novel method to detect statistically-signifcant bimodular structures,
i.e. either bipartite or core-periphery ones. It is based on a modification of
the surprise, recently proposed for detecting communities. Our variant allows
for bimodular nodes partitions to be revealed, by letting links to be placed
either 1) within the core part and between the core and the periphery parts or
2) just between the (empty) layers of a bipartite network. From a technical
point of view, this is achieved by employing a multinomial hypergeometric
distribution instead of the traditional (binomial) hypergeometric one; as in
the latter case, this allows a p-value to be assigned to any given
(bi)partition of the nodes. To illustrate the performance of our method, we
report the results of its application to several real-world networks, including
social, economic and financial ones.Comment: 11 pages, 10 figures. Python code freely available at
https://github.com/jeroenvldj/bimodular_surpris
A Group-Based Yule Model for Bipartite Author-Paper Networks
This paper presents a novel model for author-paper networks, which is based
on the assumption that authors are organized into groups and that, for each
research topic, the number of papers published by a group is based on a
success-breeds-success model. Collaboration between groups is modeled as random
invitations from a group to an outside member. To analyze the model, a number
of different metrics that can be obtained in author-paper networks were
extracted. A simulation example shows that this model can effectively mimic the
behavior of a real-world author-paper network, extracted from a collection of
900 journal papers in the field of complex networks.Comment: 13 pages (preprint format), 7 figure
Community structure and patterns of scientific collaboration in Business and Management
This is the author's accepted version of this article deposited at arXiv (arXiv:1006.1788v2 [physics.soc-ph]) and subsequently published in Scientometrics October 2011, Volume 89, Issue 1, pp 381-396. The final publication is available at link.springer.com http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-011-0439-1Author's note: 17 pages. To appear in special edition of Scientometrics. Abstract on arXiv meta-data a shorter version of abstract on actual paper (both in journal and arXiv full pape
Communities and patterns of scientific collaboration in Business and Management
This is the author's accepted version of this article deposited at arXiv (arXiv:1006.1788v2 [physics.soc-ph]) and subsequently published in Scientometrics October 2011, Volume 89, Issue 1, pp 381-396. The final publication is available at link.springer.com http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-011-0439-1Author's note: 17 pages. To appear in special edition of Scientometrics. Abstract on arXiv meta-data a shorter version of abstract on actual paper (both in journal and arXiv full pape
Communities and patterns of scientific collaboration
This is the author's accepted version of this article deposited at arXiv (arXiv:1006.1788v2 [physics.soc-ph]) and subsequently published in Scientometrics October 2011, Volume 89, Issue 1, pp 381-396. The final publication is available at link.springer.com http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-011-0439-1Author's note: 17 pages. To appear in special edition of Scientometrics. Abstract on arXiv meta-data a shorter version of abstract on actual paper (both in journal and arXiv full paper17 pages. To appear in special edition of Scientometrics. Abstract on arXiv meta-data a shorter version of abstract on actual paper (both in journal and arXiv full paper version)17 pages. To appear in special edition of Scientometrics. Abstract on arXiv meta-data a shorter version of abstract on actual paper (both in journal and arXiv full paper version)17 pages. To appear in special edition of Scientometrics. Abstract on arXiv meta-data a shorter version of abstract on actual paper (both in journal and arXiv full paper version)17 pages. To appear in special edition of Scientometrics. Abstract on arXiv meta-data a shorter version of abstract on actual paper (both in journal and arXiv full paper version)This paper investigates the role of homophily and focus constraint in shaping collaborative scientific research. First, homophily structures collaboration when scientists adhere to a norm of exclusivity in selecting similar partners at a higher rate than dissimilar ones. Two dimensions on which similarity between scientists can be assessed are their research specialties and status positions. Second, focus constraint shapes collaboration when connections among scientists depend on opportunities for social contact. Constraint comes in two forms, depending on whether it originates in institutional or geographic space. Institutional constraint refers to the tendency of scientists to select collaborators within rather than across institutional boundaries. Geographic constraint is the principle that, when collaborations span different institutions, they are more likely to involve scientists that are geographically co-located than dispersed. To study homophily and focus constraint, the paper will argue in favour of an idea of collaboration that moves beyond formal co-authorship to include also other forms of informal intellectual exchange that do not translate into the publication of joint work. A community-detection algorithm is applied to the co-authorship network of the scientists that submitted in Business and Management in the 2001 UK RAE. While results only partially support research-based homophily, they indicate that scientists use status positions for discriminating between potential partners by selecting collaborators from institutions with a rating similar to their own. Strong support is provided in favour of institutional and geographic constraints. Scientists tend to forge intra-institutional collaborations; yet, when they seek collaborators outside their own institutions, they tend to select those who are in geographic proximity
A New Approach to Analyzing Patterns of Collaboration in Co-authorship Networks - Mesoscopic Analysis and Interpretation
This paper focuses on methods to study patterns of collaboration in
co-authorship networks at the mesoscopic level. We combine qualitative methods
(participant interviews) with quantitative methods (network analysis) and
demonstrate the application and value of our approach in a case study comparing
three research fields in chemistry. A mesoscopic level of analysis means that
in addition to the basic analytic unit of the individual researcher as node in
a co-author network, we base our analysis on the observed modular structure of
co-author networks. We interpret the clustering of authors into groups as
bibliometric footprints of the basic collective units of knowledge production
in a research specialty. We find two types of coauthor-linking patterns between
author clusters that we interpret as representing two different forms of
cooperative behavior, transfer-type connections due to career migrations or
one-off services rendered, and stronger, dedicated inter-group collaboration.
Hence the generic coauthor network of a research specialty can be understood as
the overlay of two distinct types of cooperative networks between groups of
authors publishing in a research specialty. We show how our analytic approach
exposes field specific differences in the social organization of research.Comment: An earlier version of the paper was presented at ISSI 2009, 14-17
July, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Revised version accepted on 2 April 2010 for
publication in Scientometrics. Removed part on node-role connectivity profile
analysis after finding error in calculation and deciding to postpone
analysis
- …