PropertiesofElementaryRandomand PreferentialDynamicNetworks

Richard O. Legendi, Laszlo Gulyas, George Kampis

legendi@inf.elte.hu, lgulyas@colbud.hu, gkampis@colbud.hu

Problem

Sampling networks always involves the act of aggregation (e.g., when collecting longitudinal samples of networks). We sutdy how the cumulation window length eects the properties of the aggregated network.

Dynamic Networks are Sensitive to Aggregation

Network characteristics are extremely sensitive to minor changes in aggregation length. In our previous work [1] [2], we studied the cumulative properties of Elementary Dynamic Network models over the complete time period (i.e., until they reach the stable point of a full network). Here we focus on the more realistc domain of sparse (cumulative) networks. We nd that even when snapshot networks are stationary, important network characteristics (average path lenght, clustering, betwenness centrality) are extremely sensitive to aggregation (window length).
12 0.30 6 10 0.8 0.25 0 6 20000 40000 clustering 0.20 0.0 0 0.15 0.4 4 0 avgPathLength 8 2

20000

40000

200

400 Time

600

800

1000

0.00 0

0.05

0.10

200

400 Time

600

800

1000

0.00 0.02 0.04

0.06

Basic Concepts

0.5

In our work the dynamic network is a series of graphs, that is, DN = Gt (Vt , Et ), where Et Vt Vt (t 0). The initial network, G0 , is considered as a parameter of the process. The node set xed and we worked with an about constant number of edges. We assume that the evolution of the network can be described as the result of an edge creation and an edge deletion process. We dene Gt as the snapshot network and
T T

maxBetweenness

0.4

0.0 0

0.3

0.6

avgBetweenness

20000

40000

0.04

0.02

0.00

200

400 Time

600

800

1000

0.0 0

0.1

0.2

0.3

20000

40000

200

400 Time

600

800

1000

GT = (
t=0

Vt ,
t=0

Et )

for

T 0.

CPA snapshot

CPA cumulative

SPA snapshot

SPA cumulative

ER1 snapshot

ER1 cumulative

ER2 snapshot

ER2 cumulative

ER3 snapshot

ER3 cumulative

as the cumulative network.

Models
ER1

Degree Distribution Radically Changes

ing edges. ER3 G0 is a random graph. Rewire kRW edges. SPA (Snapshot preferential ) G0 is a scale free network. Add kA edges from a random node with preferential attachment based on the snapshot network. Delete kD existing edges. CPA (Cumulative preferential ) G0 is a scale free network. Add kA edges from a random node with preferential attachment based on the cumulative network. Delete kD existing edges.

G0 is a random graph. Add each nonexisting edge with pA , delete each existing edge with pD probability. ER2 G0 is a random graph. Add kA uniformly selected random new edges and delete kD exist-

Degree distributions are exceptionally sensitive to the length of the aggregation window. The same

dynamic network may produce a normal, lognormal or even power law distribution for dierent aggregation lenghts. The digree distribution of the snapshot and cumulative network

is inherently dierent. The following surfaces show the CPA model until it approaches the complete network.
CPA snapshot degrees CPA cumulative degrees

100 60

50

80

40 60

p(k)

p(k)

30

40 20 20

10 0

40000 20 40 60 20000 30000

40000 20 40 60 20000 30000

References
[1] [2] Laszlo Gulyas, George Kampis

Ti

k
80

10000

k
80

10000

Laszlo Gulyas, Richard Legendi:

Eects of Sample Duration on Network Statistics in Elementary Models of Dynamic Networks, International Conference
on Computational Science, Singapore (2011)

Taking slices of the cumulative 3D charts shows us how the degree distribution changes. The log-log charts below show the progression of these changes as the aggregation window gets larger.
ER1 Degree Distribution Comparison, Cumulative Network
1 day 1 year 5 years 10 years 15 years 500

Cumulative Properties of Elementary Dynamic Networks, The International Sunbelt

Social Network Conference XXXI (2011)

Susan Khor,

Richard Legendi and

CPA Degree Distribution Comparison, Cumulative Network
1 day 1 year 5 years 10 years 15 years

100

at the 19th International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems (MTNS 2010)
p(k)

50

20

Acknowledgements
naNets, FET-Open project no.

p(k)

10

This research was partially supported by the Hungar2

ian Government (KMOP-1.1.2-08/1-2008-0002 ) and the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme: DyFET-233847 (

http:

5 k

10

20

50

10

20

50

100

200

[3]

Gulyas, Laszlo et al.:

Betweenness Centrality Dynamics in Networks of Changing Density. Presented

200

5 k

10

Ti
20

50

//www.dynanets.org).
knowledged.

The supports are gratefully ac-