ArticleScientific reports2012
A measure of individual role in collective dynamics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeted spreader identification via lexicographic core decomposition.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A new causal centrality measure reveals the prominent role of subcortical structures in the causal architecture of the extended default mode network.Brain structure & function · 2023Article
- Extending outbreak investigation with machine learning and graph theory: Benefits of new tools with application to a nosocomial outbreak of a multidrug-resistant organism.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2023Article
- Integrated graph measures reveal survival likelihood for buildings in wildfire events.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Identification of effective spreaders in contact networks using dynamical influence.Applied network science · 2021Article
- Influencer identification in dynamical complex systems.Journal of complex networks · 2020Review
- Network Communities of Dynamical Influence.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Systematic comparison between methods for the detection of influential spreaders in complex networks.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Identifying influential spreaders by gravity model.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Dynamically induced cascading failures in power grids.Nature communications · 2018Article
- Identification of influencers through the wisdom of crowds.PloS one · 2018Article
- Dynamic-Sensitive centrality of nodes in temporal networks.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Robustness and efficiency in interconnected networks with changes in network assortativity.Applied network science · 2017Article
- Competition among networks highlights the power of the weak.Nature communications · 2016Article
- Benchmarking Measures of Network Influence.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Using Network Dynamical Influence to Drive Consensus.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Locating influential nodes via dynamics-sensitive centrality.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- The H-index of a network node and its relation to degree and coreness.Nature communications · 2016Article
- Article
- Spotting Epidemic Keystones by R0 Sensitivity Analysis: High-Risk Stations in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area.PloS one · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Identifying key players in collective dynamics remains a challenge in several research fields, from the efficient dissemination of ideas to drug target discovery in biomedical problems. The difficulty lies at several levels: how to single out the role of individual elements in such intermingled systems, or which is the best way to quantify their importance. Centrality measures describe a node's importance by its position in a network. The key issue obviated is that the contribution of a node to the collective behavior is not uniquely determined by the structure of the system but it is a result of the interplay between dynamics and network structure. We show that dynamical influence measures explicitly how strongly a node's dynamical state affects collective behavior. For critical spreading, dynamical influence targets nodes according to their spreading capabilities. For diffusive processes it quantifies how efficiently real systems may be controlled by manipulating a single node.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.