Limits...
Contagion on complex networks with persuasion.

Huang WM, Zhang LJ, Xu XJ, Fu X - Sci Rep (2016)

Bottom Line: Specifically, we study a combination of adoption and persuasion in cascading processes on complex networks.Finally, we study the effects of adoption and persuasion threshold heterogeneity on systemic stability.Though both heterogeneities give rise to global cascades, the adoption heterogeneity has an overwhelmingly stronger impact than the persuasion heterogeneity when the network connectivity is sufficiently dense.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Mathematics, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China.

ABSTRACT
The threshold model has been widely adopted as a classic model for studying contagion processes on social networks. We consider asymmetric individual interactions in social networks and introduce a persuasion mechanism into the threshold model. Specifically, we study a combination of adoption and persuasion in cascading processes on complex networks. It is found that with the introduction of the persuasion mechanism, the system may become more vulnerable to global cascades, and the effects of persuasion tend to be more significant in heterogeneous networks than those in homogeneous networks: a comparison between heterogeneous and homogeneous networks shows that under weak persuasion, heterogeneous networks tend to be more robust against random shocks than homogeneous networks; whereas under strong persuasion, homogeneous networks are more stable. Finally, we study the effects of adoption and persuasion threshold heterogeneity on systemic stability. Though both heterogeneities give rise to global cascades, the adoption heterogeneity has an overwhelmingly stronger impact than the persuasion heterogeneity when the network connectivity is sufficiently dense.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Comparison of the systemic stability of ER and SF networks.Both the adoption and persuasion thresholds are uniform. The seed fractions are N = 10−4 (upper panel) and 10−3 (lower panel), respectively. The values of the persuasion threshold are ϕ′ = 1.0 (left column), 0.9 (middle column) and 0.5 (right column), respectively.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4815014&req=5

f4: Comparison of the systemic stability of ER and SF networks.Both the adoption and persuasion thresholds are uniform. The seed fractions are N = 10−4 (upper panel) and 10−3 (lower panel), respectively. The values of the persuasion threshold are ϕ′ = 1.0 (left column), 0.9 (middle column) and 0.5 (right column), respectively.

Mentions: Although SF networks show qualitatively the same behaviour as those of ER networks with the persuasion threshold, i.e, the decrease of ϕ′ results in a larger cascade window. However, they are quantitatively different. We compare cascade windows for both networks in Fig. 4, where the upper and lower panels correspond to ρ0 = 10−4 and 10−3, respectively. Under weak persuading effect (ϕ′ = 0.9), the cascade windows in the SF networks are smaller than those in the ER networks (see Fig. 4(b,e)), which is similar to the ϕ-threshold model (see Fig. 4(a,d)), implying that heterogeneous networks are more robust against random shocks than homogeneous networks with the same connectivity. While the persuading effect is enhanced (ϕ′ = 0.5), the SF networks are much more impacted than the ER networks: when the connectivity is sufficiently sparse (z < 10 in Fig. 4(c) and z < 9 in Fig. 4(e)), the systemic stability of the SF networks is still better than that of the corresponding ER networks with the same connectivity; but when it is sufficiently dense (z > 10 in Fig. 4(c) and z > 9 in Fig. 4(e)), the SF networks tend to become less stable than the ER networks. We conclude that heterogeneous networks are more vulnerable to perturbations when the persuading effect is strong enough.


Contagion on complex networks with persuasion.

Huang WM, Zhang LJ, Xu XJ, Fu X - Sci Rep (2016)

Comparison of the systemic stability of ER and SF networks.Both the adoption and persuasion thresholds are uniform. The seed fractions are N = 10−4 (upper panel) and 10−3 (lower panel), respectively. The values of the persuasion threshold are ϕ′ = 1.0 (left column), 0.9 (middle column) and 0.5 (right column), respectively.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4815014&req=5

f4: Comparison of the systemic stability of ER and SF networks.Both the adoption and persuasion thresholds are uniform. The seed fractions are N = 10−4 (upper panel) and 10−3 (lower panel), respectively. The values of the persuasion threshold are ϕ′ = 1.0 (left column), 0.9 (middle column) and 0.5 (right column), respectively.
Mentions: Although SF networks show qualitatively the same behaviour as those of ER networks with the persuasion threshold, i.e, the decrease of ϕ′ results in a larger cascade window. However, they are quantitatively different. We compare cascade windows for both networks in Fig. 4, where the upper and lower panels correspond to ρ0 = 10−4 and 10−3, respectively. Under weak persuading effect (ϕ′ = 0.9), the cascade windows in the SF networks are smaller than those in the ER networks (see Fig. 4(b,e)), which is similar to the ϕ-threshold model (see Fig. 4(a,d)), implying that heterogeneous networks are more robust against random shocks than homogeneous networks with the same connectivity. While the persuading effect is enhanced (ϕ′ = 0.5), the SF networks are much more impacted than the ER networks: when the connectivity is sufficiently sparse (z < 10 in Fig. 4(c) and z < 9 in Fig. 4(e)), the systemic stability of the SF networks is still better than that of the corresponding ER networks with the same connectivity; but when it is sufficiently dense (z > 10 in Fig. 4(c) and z > 9 in Fig. 4(e)), the SF networks tend to become less stable than the ER networks. We conclude that heterogeneous networks are more vulnerable to perturbations when the persuading effect is strong enough.

Bottom Line: Specifically, we study a combination of adoption and persuasion in cascading processes on complex networks.Finally, we study the effects of adoption and persuasion threshold heterogeneity on systemic stability.Though both heterogeneities give rise to global cascades, the adoption heterogeneity has an overwhelmingly stronger impact than the persuasion heterogeneity when the network connectivity is sufficiently dense.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Mathematics, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China.

ABSTRACT
The threshold model has been widely adopted as a classic model for studying contagion processes on social networks. We consider asymmetric individual interactions in social networks and introduce a persuasion mechanism into the threshold model. Specifically, we study a combination of adoption and persuasion in cascading processes on complex networks. It is found that with the introduction of the persuasion mechanism, the system may become more vulnerable to global cascades, and the effects of persuasion tend to be more significant in heterogeneous networks than those in homogeneous networks: a comparison between heterogeneous and homogeneous networks shows that under weak persuasion, heterogeneous networks tend to be more robust against random shocks than homogeneous networks; whereas under strong persuasion, homogeneous networks are more stable. Finally, we study the effects of adoption and persuasion threshold heterogeneity on systemic stability. Though both heterogeneities give rise to global cascades, the adoption heterogeneity has an overwhelmingly stronger impact than the persuasion heterogeneity when the network connectivity is sufficiently dense.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus