
IV. Ecosmomics: An Independent, UniVersal, Source CodeScript of Generative Complex Network Systems1. Network Physics: A Vital Interlinked Anatomy and Physiology Iniquez, Gerardo, et al. Universal Dynamics of Ranking. arXiv:2104.13439. GI, Central European University, Vienna, Carlos Pineda and Carlos Gershenson, National Autonomous University Mexico, and AlbertLaszlo Barabasi, Northeastern University theorists extend their complexity studies to discern how constant changes in subject rank listings, as an example of our penchant to arrange everything into a relative order, can exhibit common, temporal patterns and features. A universality is then depicted across many social instances. An allusion to statistical, manybody physical phenomena in effect could also be made. Virtually anything can be and is ranked; people and animals, universities and countries, words and genes. Rankings reduce the components of highly complex systems into ordered lists, aiming to capture the fitness or ability of each element to perform relevant functions. Far less is known, however, about ranking dynamics, when the elements change their rank in time. Here we explore the dynamics of 30 ranking lists in natural, social, economic, and infrastructural systems, comprising millions of elements, whose temporal scales span from minutes to centuries. We find that the flux governing the arrival of new elements into a ranking list reveals systems with identifiable patterns of stability: in highflux systems only the top of the list is stable, while in lowflux systems the top and bottom are equally stable. Jalan, Sarika, et al. Unveiling the MultiFractal Structure of Complex Networks. arXiv:1610.06662. Indian Institute of Technology Indore, and CNR Institute of Complex Systems, Florence, Italy researchers including Stefano Boccaletti point out the invariant selfsimilar character of the universal connections that link all the discrete elements and entities. Into autumn 2016 this grand display of me and We reciprocal communities increasingly seems to imply a natural genetic code in infinite effect from uniVerse to us. The fractal nature of graphs has traditionally been investigated by using the nodes of networks as the basic units. Here, instead, we propose to concentrate on the graph edges, and introduce a practical and computationally not demanding method for revealing changes in the fractal behavior of networks, and particularly for allowing distinction between monofractal, quasi monofractal, and multifractal structures. We show that degree homogeneity plays a crucial role in determining the fractal nature of the underlying network, and report on six different proteinprotein interaction networks along with their corresponding random networks. Our analysis allows to identify varying levels of complexity in the species. (Abstract) Kenett, Dror, et al. Networks of Networks. Chaos, Solitons, & Fractals. 80/1, 2015. With coauthors Matjaz Perc and Stefano Boccaletti, an introduction to an issue in preparation on this latest expansion of network science. As the second quotes notes, akin to other current work such as Scott Tremaine’s study of planetary systems, an endeavor is made to situate, and interpret such ubiquitous organic phenomena by way of statistical physics theory. Recent research and reviews attest to the fact that networks of networks are the next frontier in network science. Not only are interactions limited and thus inadequately described by wellmixed models, it is also a fact that the networks that should be an integral part of such models are often interconnected, thus making the processes that are unfolding on them interdependent. From the World economy and transportation systems to social media, it is clear that processes taking place in one network might significantly affect what is happening in many other networks. Within an interdependent system, each type of interaction has a certain relevance and meaning, so that treating all the links identically inevitably leads to information loss. Networks of networks, interdependent networks, or multilayer networks are therefore a much better and realistic description of such systems, and this Special Issue is devoted to their structure, dynamics and evolution, as well as to the study of emergent properties in multilayered systems in general. Topics of interest include but are not limited to the spread of epidemics and information, percolation, diffusion, synchronization, collective behavior, and evolutionary games on networks of networks. (Abstract) Kepes, Francois, ed. Biological Networks. Singapore: World Scientific, 2008. Over the past decade within the field of complexity studies, the ubiquitous presence of scalefree, weblike, systems of weighted nodes and links has been well quantified and found across natural and societal kingdoms. This volume of international players such as Ricard Sole and Neo Martinez surveys their common, recurrent properties. Khanra, P., et al. Endowing Networks with Desired Symmetries and Modular Behavior. arXiv:2302.10548. Ten system scientists in the USA, India, Spain, and Italy including Stefano Boccaletti post a latest example of ongoing theoretical distillations of an actual independent, universal, genetic domain with these additional lifefriendly, anatomy/physiological attributes. Symmetries in a network regulate its organization into functional clustered states. Given a generic ensemble of nodes and a desirable cluster (or group of clusters), we exploit the direct connection between the elements of the eigenvector centrality and the graph symmetries to generate a network equipped with the desired cluster(s), with such a synthetical structure being furthermore perfectly reflected in the modular organization of the network's functioning. Our results solve a relevant problem of reverse engineering, and are of generic application in all cases where a desired parallel functioning needs to be blueprinted. Kitsak, Maksim. Latent Geometry for Complementary Driven Networks. arXiv:2003.06665. A Northeastern University, Network Science Institute physicist elucidates another innate proclivity that networlds everywhere commonly appear to possess. As the abstract notes, reciprocal forms and/or actions seem to be drawn together so as to conceive a beneficial, more effective whole. Networks of interdisciplinary teams, biological interactions as well as food webs are examples of networks that are shaped by complementarity principles: connections in these networks are preferentially established between nodes with complementary properties. We propose a geometric framework for this property by first noting that traditional methods which embed networks into latent metric spaces are not applicable. We then consider a crossgeometric representation which (i) follows naturally from the complementarity rule, (ii) is consistent with the metric property of the latent space, (iii) reproduces structural properties of real complementaritydriven networks and (iv) allows for prediction of missing links with accuracy surpassing similaritybased methods. (Abstract excerpt) Kivela, Mikko, et al. Multilayer Networks. Journal of Complex Networks. 2/3, 2014. In this new Oxford journal, systems mathematicians from the UK, Spain, France and Ireland, including Mason Porter, post a 59 page introductory survey with 376 references that has become, along with Stefano Boccaletti’s work (search), a prime document for this latest expansion of nature’s intrinsic vitalities. In most natural and engineered systems, a set of entities interact with each other in complicated patterns that can encompass multiple types of relationships, change in time, and include other types of complications. Such systems include multiple subsystems and layers of connectivity, and it is important to take such "multilayer" features into account to try to improve our understanding of complex systems. The origins of such efforts date back several decades and arose in multiple disciplines, and now the study of multilayer networks has become one of the most important directions in network science. In this paper, we discuss the history of multilayer networks (and related concepts) and review the exploding body of work on such networks. To unify the disparate terminology in the large body of recent work, we discuss a general framework for multilayer networks, construct a dictionary of terminology to relate the numerous existing concepts to each other, and provide a thorough discussion that compares, contrasts, and translates between related notions such as multilayer networks, multiplex networks, interdependent networks, networks of networks, and many others. (Abstract) Kleineberg, KijKolja, et al. Hidden Geometric Correlations in Real Multiplex Networks. Nature Physics. 12/11, 2016. University of Barcelona and Cyprus University of Technology researchers including Martin Boguna tease out nature’s intricate orderliness by way of deeply persistent topological interconnections. In this regard, such phenomena serves as an independent source which becomes exemplified in kind across every cosmos to creature scale and instance. Real networks often form interacting parts of larger and more complex systems. Examples can be found in different domains, ranging from the Internet to structural and functional brain networks. Here, we show that these multiplex systems are not random combinations of single network layers. Instead, they are organized in specific ways dictated by hidden geometric correlations between the layers. We find that these correlations are significant in different real multiplexes, and form a key framework for answering many important questions. Specifically, we show that these geometric correlations facilitate the definition and detection of multidimensional communities, which are sets of nodes that are simultaneously similar in multiple layers. They also enable accurate translayer link prediction, meaning that connections in one layer can be predicted by observing the hidden geometric space of another layer. And they allow efficient targeted navigation in the multilayer system using only local knowledge, outperforming navigation in the single layers only if the geometric correlations are sufficiently strong. (Abstract) Klimm, Florian, et al. Individual Node’s Contribution to the Mesoscale of Complex Networks. New Journal of Physics. 16/125006, 2014. After much identification and study of modules, hubs, and communities in living, interconnective systems, Humboldt University, Qatar Computing Research Institute, and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona researchers including Jurgen Kurths, can now technically describe the place, importance and contribution of each discrete node, element, entity, in their relative dynamic network setting. The analysis of complex networks is devoted to the statistical characterization of the topology of graphs at different scales of organization in order to understand their functionality. While the modular structure of networks has become an essential element to better apprehend their complexity, the efforts to characterize the mesoscale of networks have focused on the identification of the modules rather than describing the mesoscale in an informative manner. Here we propose a framework to characterize the position every node takes within the modular configuration of complex networks and to evaluate their function accordingly. For illustration, we apply this framework to a set of synthetic networks, empirical neural networks, and to the transcriptional regulatory network of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis. We find that the architecture of both neuronal and transcriptional networks are optimized for the processing of multisensory information with the coexistence of welldefined modules of specialized components and the presence of hubs conveying information from and to the distinct functional domains. (Abstract) Kojaku, Sadamori and Naoki Masuda. Finding Multiple CorePeriphery Pairs in Networks. arXiv:1702.06903. University of Bristol engineering mathematicians describe this common topological phenomena (search Porter) and then evince its presence across social, infrastructure and political settings. With a coreperiphery structure of networks, core nodes are densely interconnected, peripheral nodes are connected to core nodes to different extents, and peripheral nodes are sparsely interconnected. Coreperiphery structure composed of a single core and periphery has been identified for various networks. However, analogous to the observation that many empirical networks are composed of densely interconnected groups of nodes, i.e., communities, a network may be better regarded as a collection of multiple cores and peripheries. For example, we find distinct coreperiphery pairs with different political leanings in a network of political blogs and separation between international and domestic subnetworks of airports in some single countries in a worldwide airport network. (Abstract) Kostic, Daniel. Mechanistic and Topological Explanations. Synthese. 195/1, 2018. An introduction by a University of Paris Sorbonne scholar to this special issue, coedited by DK and Philip Huneman. We earlier entered in 2016 Kostic’s full paper, The Topological Realization, online in 2016, which argued that this current relational, network turn need be given a proper philosophical appreciation. With a notice of gene regulatory, physiological, neural nets, and more it is averred that such a basis is vital so to move beyond a prior particulate emphasis. See also herein Diversifying the Picture of Explanations in Biological Sciences by P. Huneman, Mechanisms Meet Structural Explanation by Laura Felline, and Network Representation and Complex Systems by Charles Rathkopf. Kostic, Daniel. The Topological Realization. Synthese. Online October, 2016. A University of Paris philosopher attempts to give full notice to these heretofore unappreciated interconnective, network structural properties of natural and social systems, along with their prior nodal, discrete components. The special Synthese issue this paper is included in is now available as 195/1 January 2018, search DK for his Introduction and its contents. In this paper, I argue that the newly developed network approach in neuroscience and biology provides a basis for formulating a unique type of realization, which I call topological realization. Some of its features and its relation to one of the dominant paradigms in the sciences, i.e. the mechanistic one, are already being discussed in the literature. But the detailed features of topological realization, its explanatory power and its relation to another prominent view, namely the semantic one, have not yet been discussed. I argue that topological realization is distinct from mechanistic and semantic ones because this framework is not based on local realisers, regardless of the scale but on global realizers. Furthermore, topological realization enables us to answer the “why” questions, which make it explanatory. (Edited Abstract)
Previous 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 Next [More Pages]


HOME 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Introduction 
GENESIS VISION 
LEARNING PLANET 
ORGANIC UNIVERSE 