Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28790321›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Reliable Multi-Fractal Characterization of Weighted Complex Networks: Algorithms and Implications.

Yuankun Xue, Paul Bogdan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Fractal Similarity of Pain Brain Networks.Advances in neurobiology · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Network bypasses sustain complexity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yuankun XueMing Hsieh Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, 90007, CA, USA.
Paul BogdanMing Hsieh Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, 90007, CA, USA. pbogdan@usc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Through an elegant geometrical interpretation, the multi-fractal analysis quantifies the spatial and temporal irregularities of the structural and dynamical formation of complex networks. Despite its effectiveness in unweighted networks, the multi-fractal geometry of weighted complex networks, the role of interaction intensity, the influence of the embedding metric spaces and the design of reliable estimation algorithms remain open challenges. To address these challenges, we present a set of reliable multi-fractal estimation algorithms for quantifying the structural complexity and heterogeneity of weighted complex networks. Our methodology uncovers that (i) the weights of complex networks and their underlying metric spaces play a key role in dictating the existence of multi-fractal scaling and (ii) the multi-fractal scaling can be localized in both space and scales. In addition, this multi-fractal characterization framework enables the construction of a scaling-based similarity metric and the identification of community structure of human brain connectome. The detected communities are accurately aligned with the biological brain connectivity patterns. This characterization framework has no constraint on the target network and can thus be leveraged as a basis for both structural and dynamic analysis of networks in a wide spectrum of applications.

Identifiers

PMID28790321
PMCPMC5548933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.