ArticleScientific reports2017
Social contagions on interdependent lattice networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Coevolution spreading in complex networks.Physics reports · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although an increasing amount of research is being done on the dynamical processes on interdependent spatial networks, knowledge of how interdependent spatial networks influence the dynamics of social contagion in them is sparse. Here we present a novel non-Markovian social contagion model on interdependent spatial networks composed of two identical two-dimensional lattices. We compare the dynamics of social contagion on networks with different fractions of dependency links and find that the density of final recovered nodes increases as the number of dependency links is increased. We use a finite-size analysis method to identify the type of phase transition in the giant connected components (GCC) of the final adopted nodes and find that as we increase the fraction of dependency links, the phase transition switches from second-order to first-order. In strong interdependent spatial networks with abundant dependency links, increasing the fraction of initial adopted nodes can induce the switch from a first-order to second-order phase transition associated with social contagion dynamics. In networks with a small number of dependency links, the phase transition remains second-order. In addition, both the second-order and first-order phase transition points can be decreased by increasing the fraction of dependency links or the number of initially-adopted nodes.
Indexed as
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.