ArticleScientific reports2016
Using Network Dynamical Influence to Drive Consensus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transition from simple to complex contagion in collective decision-making.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Identification of effective spreaders in contact networks using dynamical influence.Applied network science · 2021Article
- Network Communities of Dynamical Influence.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Optimal network topology for responsive collective behavior.Science advances · 2019Article
- Conflicts of interest improve collective computation of adaptive social structures.Science advances · 2018Article
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
Consensus and decision-making are often analysed in the context of networks, with many studies focusing attention on ranking the nodes of a network depending on their relative importance to information routing. Dynamical influence ranks the nodes with respect to their ability to influence the evolution of the associated network dynamical system. In this study it is shown that dynamical influence not only ranks the nodes, but also provides a naturally optimised distribution of effort to steer a network from one state to another. An example is provided where the "steering" refers to the physical change in velocity of self-propelled agents interacting through a network. Distinct from other works on this subject, this study looks at directed and hence more general graphs. The findings are presented with a theoretical angle, without targeting particular applications or networked systems; however, the framework and results offer parallels with biological flocks and swarms and opportunities for design of technological networks.
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.