Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33465154›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Recovery patterns and physics of the network.

Alireza Ermagun, Nazanin Tajik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Alireza ErmagunDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2820-5724
Nazanin TajikDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a progressively interconnected world, the loss of system resilience has consequences for human health, the economy, and the environment. Research has exploited the science of networks to explain the resilience of complex systems against random attacks, malicious attacks, and the localized attacks induced by natural disasters or mass attacks. Little is known about the elucidation of system recovery by the network topology. This study adds to the knowledge of network resilience by examining the nexus of recoverability and network topology. We establish a new paradigm for identifying the recovery behavior of networks and introduce the recoverability measure. Results indicate that the recovery response behavior and the recoverability measure are the function of both size and topology of networks. In small sized networks, the return to recovery exhibits homogeneous recovery behavior over topology, while the return shape is dispersed with an increase in the size of network. A network becomes more recoverable as connectivity measures of the network increase, and less recoverable as accessibility measures of network increase. Overall, the results not only offer guidance on designing recoverable networks, but also depict the recovery nature of networks deliberately following a disruption. Our recovery behavior and recoverability measure has been tested on 16 distinct network topologies. The relevant recovery behavior can be generalized based on our definition for any network topology recovering deliberately.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsPattern Recognition, AutomatedComputer Communication NetworksComputer SimulationEnvironmentHealthHumansModels, TheoreticalPhysics

Identifiers

PMID33465154
PMCPMC7815135

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.