Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36823226›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Uncertainty in vulnerability of networks under attack.

Alireza Ermagun, Nazanin Tajik, Hani Mahmassani

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alireza ErmagunDepartment of Geography and Geoinformation Science, George Mason University, 4400 University Dr., Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA. aermagun@gmu.edu.
Nazanin TajikDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Mississippi State University, 501 Hardy Road, 260 McCain Hall, Mississippi State, MS, 39762, USA.
Hani MahmassaniDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Northwestern University, 2145 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
George Mason University · USMississippi State University · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study builds conceptual explanations and empirical examinations of the vulnerability response of networks under attack. Two quantities of "vulnerability" and "uncertainty in vulnerability" are defined by scrutinizing the performance loss trajectory of networks experiencing attacks. Both vulnerability and uncertainty in vulnerability quantities are a function of the network topology and size. This is tested on 16 distinct topologies appearing in infrastructure, social, and biological networks with 8 to 26 nodes under two percolation scenarios exemplifying benign and malicious attacks. The findings imply (i) crossing path, tree, and diverging tail are the most vulnerable topologies, (ii) complete and matching pairs are the least vulnerable topologies, (iii) complete grid and complete topologies show the most uncertainty for vulnerability, and (iv) hub-and-spoke and double u exhibit the least uncertainty in vulnerability. The findings also imply that both vulnerability and uncertainty in vulnerability increase with an increase in the size of the network. It is argued that in networks with no undirected cycle and one undirected cycle, the uncertainty in vulnerability is maximal earlier in the percolation process. With an increase in the number of cycles, the uncertainty in vulnerability is accumulated at the end of the percolation process. This emphasizes the role of tailoring preparedness, response, and recovery phases for networks with different topologies when they might experience disruption.

Identifiers

PMID36823226
PMCPMC9947912
OpenAlexW4321595957

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.