ArticleScientific reports2022
Comparison of observer based methods for source localisation in complex networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Active querying approach to epidemic source detection on contact networks.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Diffusion characteristics classification framework for identification of diffusion source in complex networks.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, research on methods for locating a source of spreading phenomena in complex networks has seen numerous advances. Such methods can be applied not only to searching for the "patient zero" in epidemics, but also finding the true sources of false or malicious messages circulating in the online social networks. Many methods for solving this problem have been established and tested in various circumstances. Yet, we still lack reviews that would include a direct comparison of efficiency of these methods. In this paper, we provide a thorough comparison of several observer-based methods for source localisation on complex networks. All methods use information about the exact time of spread arrival at a pre-selected group of vertices called observers. We investigate how the precision of the studied methods depends on the network topology, density of observers, infection rate, and observers' placement strategy. The direct comparison between methods allows for an informed choice of the methods for applications or further research. We find that the Pearson correlation based method and the method based on the analysis of multiple paths are the most effective in networks with synthetic or real topologies. The former method dominates when the infection rate is low; otherwise, the latter method takes over.
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.