Small worlds: How and why

Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics

Volumn 63, Issue 2 I, 2001, Pages 0211171-02111712

  Mathias, Nisha ^a   Gopal, Venkatesh ^b,c  

^a INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE   (India)

^b RAMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (India)

^c MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIOPHYSICS; BRAIN; HUMAN; PATHOLOGY; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; BIOPHYSICAL PHENOMENA; BIOPHYSICS; BRAIN; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER);

COMPUTER SIMULATION; ELECTRIC NETWORK TOPOLOGY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NEURAL NETWORKS; SIMULATED ANNEALING;

SMALL-WORLD NETWORKS; TRANSPORTATION NETWORKS;

COMPUTER NETWORKS;

EID: 0000155542     PISSN: 15393755     EISSN: 15502376     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.63.021117     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. This is stronger than the usual notion of a regular graph wherein all vertices have the same degree.
2. D. J. Watts and S. H. Strogatz, Nature (London) 393, 440 (1998).
3. It is instructive to note, however, that the graph though random is not equivalent to a random graph in Ref. [4] due to a constraint imposed by the rewiring which ensures that the degree of each vertex is at least k/2.
4. B. Bollobas, Random Graphs (Academic Press, New York, 1985).
5. C. Cherniak, Trends Neurosci. 18, 522 (1995).
6. C. Cherniak, J. Neurosci. 14, 2418 (1994).
7. R. Kasturirangan, e-print xxx.lanl.gov/cond-mat/9904055.
8. W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992).
9. M. E. J. Newman and G. T. Barkema, Monte Carlo Methods in Statistical Physics (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1999).
10. D. J. Watts, Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks between Order and Randomness (Princeton University Press, Princeton,
11. S. N. Dorogovtsev and J. F. F. Mendes, Europhys. Lett. 50, 1 (2000).
12. M. E. J. Newman, e-print xxx.lanl.gov/abs/cond-mat/0001118.
13. This explains the use of "random" to describe this graph. Although the edges are uniformly distributed as in a random graph, all the edges are not randomly distributed (due to the set of edges that form the universal hub). [14]
14. A. Barrat and M. Weigt, Eur. Phys. J. B 13, 547 (2000).
15. v. Their clustering coefficient can be taken to be either 0 or 1. Note that, rather than 0, a value of 1 would result in the average clustering coefficient being higher than that at the universal hub.
16. COCOON '99, edited by T. Asano, H. Imai, D. T. Lee, S. Nakano, and T. Tokuyama (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1999), LNCS No. 1672, pp. 1-17.
17. A.-L. Barabási and R. Albert, Science 286, 509 (1999).
18. R. Matthews, New Sei. 164, 24 (2000).
19. N. Mathias, M. Sei. thesis, Department of Computer Science and Automation, Indian Institute of Science, 2000.