ArticleScientific reports2017
Analysis and evaluation of the entropy indices of a static network structure.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The network structural entropy for single-cell RNA sequencing data during skin aging.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Exploring the Entropy Complex Networks with Latent Interaction.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Network Structure Entropy Considering Series-Parallel Structures.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Survey of Information Entropy Metrics for Complex Networks.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Universality Classes and Information-Theoretic Measures of Complexity via Group Entropies.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Stock Net Entropy: Evidence from the Chinese Growth Enterprise Market.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Growth dynamics and complexity of national economies in the global trade network.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although degree distribution entropy (DDE), SD structure entropy (SDSE), Wu structure entropy (WSE) and FB structure entropy (FBSE) are four static network structure entropy indices widely used to quantify the heterogeneity of a complex network, previous studies have paid little attention to their differing abilities to describe network structure. We calculate these four structure entropies for four benchmark networks and compare the results by measuring the ability of each index to characterize network heterogeneity. We find that SDSE and FBSE more accurately characterize network heterogeneity than WSE and DDE. We also find that existing benchmark networks fail to distinguish SDSE and FBSE because they cannot discriminate local and global network heterogeneity. We solve this problem by proposing an evolving caveman network that reveals the differences between structure entropy indices by comparing the sensitivities during the network evolutionary process. Mathematical analysis and computational simulation both indicate that FBSE describes the global topology variation in the evolutionary process of a caveman network, and that the other three structure entropy indices reflect only local network heterogeneity. Our study offers an expansive view of the structural complexity of networks and expands our understanding of complex network behavior.
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.