We study dynamics of opinion formation in a network of coupled agents. As the network evolves to a steady state, opinions of agents within the same community converge faster than those of other agents. This framework allows us to study how network topology and network flow, which mediates the transfer of opinions between agents, both affect the formation of communities. In traditional models of opinion dynamics, agents are coupled via conservative flows, which result in one-to-one opinion transfer. However, social interactions are often non-conservative, resulting in one-to-many transfer of opinions. We study opinion formation in networks using one-to-one and one-to-many interactions and show that they lead to different community structure within the same network.
Centrality measures, or at least popular interpretations of these measures, make implicit assumptions about the manner in which traffic flows through a network. For example, some measures count only geodesic paths, apparently assuming that whatever flows through the network only moves along the shortest possible paths. This paper lays out a typology of network flows based on two dimensions of variation, namely the kinds of trajectories that traffic may follow (geodesics, paths, trails, or walks) and the method of spread (broadcast, serial replication, or transfer). Measures of centrality are then matched to the kinds of flows that they are appropriate for. Simulations are used to examine the relationship between type of flow and the differential importance of nodes with respect to key measurements such as speed of reception of traffic and frequency of receiving traffic. It is shown that the off-the-shelf formulas for centrality measures are fully applicable only for the specific flow processes they are designed for, and that when they are applied to other flow processes they get the “wrong” answer. It is noted that the most commonly used centrality measures are not appropriate for most of the flows we are routinely interested in. A key claim made in this paper is that centrality measures can be regarded as generating expected values for certain kinds of node outcomes (such as speed and frequency of reception) given implicit models of how traffic flows, and that this provides a new and useful way of thinking about centrality. © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Capturing dynamics of the spread of information and disease with random flow on networks is a paradigm. We show that this conventional approach ignores an important feature of the dynamics: where flow moves to depends on where it comes from. That is, memory matters. We analyze multi-step pathways from different systems and show that ignoring memory overestimates the number of pathways by up to 400 per step, with profound consequences for community detection and ranking as well as for epidemic spreading. Specifically, memoryless dynamics on networks understate the effect of communities and exaggerate the effect of highly connected nodes. Including memory reveals actual travel patterns in air traffic, ranking that favors specialized journals in scientific communication, and diseases that spread more slowly and persist longer in hospitals. The concept of centrality is often invoked in social network analysis, and diverse indices have been proposed to measure it. This paper develops a unified framework for the measurement of centrality. All measures of centrality assess a node's involvement in the walk structure of a network. Measures vary along four key dimensions: type of nodal involvement assessed, type of walk considered, property of walk assessed, and choice of summary measure. If we cross-classify measures by type of nodal involvement (radial versus medial) and property of walk assessed (volume versus length), we obtain a four-fold polychotomization with one cell empty which mirrors Freeman's 1979 categorization. At a more substantive level, measures of centrality summarize a node's involvement in or contribution to the cohesiveness of the network. Radial measures in particular are reductions of pair-wise proximities cohesion to attributes of nodes or actors. The usefulness and interpretability of radial measures depend on the fit of the cohesion matrix to the one-dimensional model. In network terms, a network that is fit by a one-dimensional model has a core-periphery structure in which all nodes revolve more or less closely around a single core. This in turn implies that the network does not contain distinct cohesive subgroups. Thus, centrality is shown to be intimately connected with the cohesive subgroup structure of a network. The behavior of complex systems is determined not only by the topological organization of their interconnections but also by the dynamical processes taking place among their constituents. A faithful modeling of the dynamics is essential because different dynamical processes may be affected very differently by network topology. A full characterization of such systems thus requires a formalization that encompasses both aspects simultaneously, rather than relying only on the topological adjacency matrix. To achieve this, we introduce the concept of flow graphs, namely weighted networks where dynamical flows are embedded into the link weights. Flow graphs provide an integrated representation of the structure and dynamics of the system, which can then be analyzed with standard tools from network theory. Conversely, a structural network feature of our choice can also be used as the basis for the construction of a flow graph that will then encompass a dynamics biased by such a feature. We illustrate the ideas by focusing on the mathematical properties of generic linear processes on complex networks that can be represented as biased random walks and their dual consensus dynamics, and show how our framework improves our understanding of these processes.