Consistency and differences between centrality measures across distinct classes of networks.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
06
02
2019
accepted:
08
07
2019
entrez:
27
7
2019
pubmed:
28
7
2019
medline:
29
2
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The roles of different nodes within a network are often understood through centrality analysis, which aims to quantify the capacity of a node to influence, or be influenced by, other nodes via its connection topology. Many different centrality measures have been proposed, but the degree to which they offer unique information, and whether it is advantageous to use multiple centrality measures to define node roles, is unclear. Here we calculate correlations between 17 different centrality measures across 212 diverse real-world networks, examine how these correlations relate to variations in network density and global topology, and investigate whether nodes can be clustered into distinct classes according to their centrality profiles. We find that centrality measures are generally positively correlated to each other, the strength of these correlations varies across networks, and network modularity plays a key role in driving these cross-network variations. Data-driven clustering of nodes based on centrality profiles can distinguish different roles, including topological cores of highly central nodes and peripheries of less central nodes. Our findings illustrate how network topology shapes the pattern of correlations between centrality measures and demonstrate how a comparative approach to network centrality can inform the interpretation of nodal roles in complex networks.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31348798
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220061
pii: PONE-D-19-03655
pmc: PMC6660088
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0220061Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Nature. 2005 Feb 24;433(7028):895-900
pubmed: 15729348
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2005 May;71(5 Pt 2):056103
pubmed: 16089598
J Neurosci. 2013 Feb 27;33(9):4024-31
pubmed: 23447611
PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e59613
pubmed: 23565156
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Dec 11;109(50):20608-13
pubmed: 23185007
PLoS One. 2015 Nov 16;10(11):e0143111
pubmed: 26571275
BMC Syst Biol. 2018 Jul 31;12(1):80
pubmed: 30064421
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2010 Apr;81(4 Pt 2):046106
pubmed: 20481785
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2009 Jul;80(1 Pt 2):016118
pubmed: 19658785
Neuroimage. 2010 Sep;52(3):1059-69
pubmed: 19819337
Connect (Tor). 2008 Jan 1;28(1):16-26
pubmed: 20505784
BMC Syst Biol. 2009 Oct 13;3:102
pubmed: 19822021
Phys Rev Lett. 2001 Nov 5;87(19):198701
pubmed: 11690461
IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 1979 Feb;1(2):224-7
pubmed: 21868852
Nat Commun. 2016 Jan 12;7:10168
pubmed: 26754161
Nature. 1998 Jun 4;393(6684):440-2
pubmed: 9623998
PLoS One. 2014 Dec 30;9(12):e115503
pubmed: 25549088
Psychometrika. 1966 Dec;31(4):581-603
pubmed: 5232444
Science. 2002 May 3;296(5569):910-3
pubmed: 11988575
Hum Brain Mapp. 2018 Apr;39(4):1647-1663
pubmed: 29314415
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2004 Feb;69(2 Pt 2):026113
pubmed: 14995526
Neuron. 2013 Aug 21;79(4):798-813
pubmed: 23972601
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2017 Dec 14;19(1):17-33
pubmed: 29238085
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2016 Apr 13;374(2065):20150202
pubmed: 26953178
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 07;9(4):e90283
pubmed: 24709999
Neuroimage. 2012 Oct 1;62(4):2222-31
pubmed: 22366334
J R Soc Interface. 2013 Apr 03;10(83):20130048
pubmed: 23554344
PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e58070
pubmed: 23505455
Nature. 2001 May 3;411(6833):41-2
pubmed: 11333967
PLoS One. 2010 Aug 16;5(8):e12200
pubmed: 20808943
Phys Rev Lett. 2004 Mar 19;92(11):118701
pubmed: 15089179
Sci Rep. 2012;2:336
pubmed: 22468223
Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2011 Apr;83(4 Pt 2):046127
pubmed: 21599260