Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28950650›Full record

ArticlePhysical review. E2017

Accurate ranking of influential spreaders in networks based on dynamically asymmetric link weights.

Ying Liu, Ming Tang, Younghae Do, Pak Ming Hui

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physical review. E, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ying LiuBig Data Research Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China.
Ming TangBig Data Research Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China.
Younghae DoDepartment of Mathematics, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 702-701, South Korea.
Pak Ming HuiDepartment of Physics, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Chinese University of Hong Kong · CNEast China Normal University · CNKyungpook National University · KRSouthwest Petroleum University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We propose an efficient and accurate measure for ranking spreaders and identifying the influential ones in spreading processes in networks. While the edges determine the connections among the nodes, their specific role in spreading should be considered explicitly. An edge connecting nodes i and j may differ in its importance for spreading from i to j and from j to i. The key issue is whether node j, after infected by i through the edge, would reach out to other nodes that i itself could not reach directly. It becomes necessary to invoke two unequal weights w_{ij} and w_{ji} characterizing the importance of an edge according to the neighborhoods of nodes i and j. The total asymmetric directional weights originating from a node leads to a novel measure s_{i}, which quantifies the impact of the node in spreading processes. An s-shell decomposition scheme further assigns an s-shell index or weighted coreness to the nodes. The effectiveness and accuracy of rankings based on s_{i} and the weighted coreness are demonstrated by applying them to nine real-world networks. Results show that they generally outperform rankings based on the nodes' degree and k-shell index while maintaining a low computational complexity. Our work represents a crucial step towards understanding and controlling the spread of diseases, rumors, information, trends, and innovations in networks.

Indexed as

Models, Theoretical

Identifiers

PMID28950650
PMCPMC7217521
OpenAlexW2613588287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.