ArticlePloS one2026
Critical node identification and resilience analysis against cascading failures.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ensuring the robustness and resilience of critical infrastructure networks such as transportation and energy systems is a core security challenge for modern societies. Vulnerabilities in these networks often concentrate on a small number of critical nodes, whose failure can trigger catastrophic cascading failures. Therefore, accurately identifying critical nodes and formulating effective reinforcement strategies are crucial for enhancing the overall defense capability of the system. Existing graph neural network (GNN)-based methods often rely on topological centrality metrics, neglecting the distribution of node information and the impacts of cascading failures. To bridge this gap, this study constructs a comprehensive analytical framework (TEC-GNN, Topology-Entropy-Cascading Graph Neural Network) integrating graph neural networks, feature engineering, and resilience assessment. It aims to address two core questions: which graph neural network model is most suitable for critical node identification, and how to enhance network resilience by regulating redundant resource allocation. Systematic evaluation indicates that the GraphSAGE model delivers the best overall performance in critical node identification. Its results exhibit high consistency with supervised signals (Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.822), achieving a Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain at Top-K (NDCG@K) of 0.918, an F1 Score at Top-K (F1@K) of 0.879, and a Top-K accuracy of 0.879. Its inference efficiency (0.002 s) is comparable to GCN and significantly outperforms GAT, meeting the demands of real-time analysis for large-scale networks. After feature dimension reduction via principal component analysis (PCA), the model's discriminative power further improved, with effect size (Cohen's d) increasing by approximately 4% without efficiency loss, validating the effectiveness of scientific dimension reduction. The model's accuracy was robustly validated through attack experiments: selectively removing the top 10% critical nodes identified by GraphSAGE reduced the network's largest connected component ratio (LCC_Ratio) to approximately 0.4, severely impairing network functionality. When the removal rate reached 20% (equivalent to 60% removal in random attacks), the network became nearly paralyzed. Another core finding reveals the complex nonlinear regulatory mechanism of redundancy coefficient β on network resilience. The resilience metric R exhibits clear diminishing marginal returns with increasing β: R rises rapidly as β increases from 0 to 0.5, then slows significantly with fluctuations thereafter. Based on this, the study proposes a "precision reinforcement" strategy: enhancing redundancy allocation only for critical nodes identified by GraphSAGE enables low-cost resilience improvement (e.g., R increases from 0.874 to 0.883). This strategy provides an efficient path for system fortification under resource constraints. The research framework proposed in this paper provides interpretable and scalable theoretical and methodological support for vulnerability assessment and resilience enhancement in critical infrastructure. The validated GraphSAGE model and "targeted reinforcement" strategy are particularly suitable for risk prevention and resource optimization in major infrastructure systems requiring dynamic analysis and rapid response, such as transportation and power grids.
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.