↓ Skip to main content

Hodge Decomposition of Information Flow on Small-World Networks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neural Circuits, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Hodge Decomposition of Information Flow on Small-World Networks
Published in
Frontiers in Neural Circuits, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fncir.2016.00077
Pubmed ID
Authors

Taichi Haruna, Yuuya Fujiki

Abstract

We investigate the influence of the small-world topology on the composition of information flow on networks. By appealing to the combinatorial Hodge theory, we decompose information flow generated by random threshold networks on the Watts-Strogatz model into three components: gradient, harmonic and curl flows. The harmonic and curl flows represent globally circular and locally circular components, respectively. The Watts-Strogatz model bridges the two extreme network topologies, a lattice network and a random network, by a single parameter that is the probability of random rewiring. The small-world topology is realized within a certain range between them. By numerical simulation we found that as networks become more random the ratio of harmonic flow to the total magnitude of information flow increases whereas the ratio of curl flow decreases. Furthermore, both quantities are significantly enhanced from the level when only network structure is considered for the network close to a random network and a lattice network, respectively. Finally, the sum of these two ratios takes its maximum value within the small-world region. These findings suggest that the dynamical information counterpart of global integration and that of local segregation are the harmonic flow and the curl flow, respectively, and that a part of the small-world region is dominated by internal circulation of information flow.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 33%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 20%
Neuroscience 3 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 13%
Physics and Astronomy 2 13%
Decision Sciences 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 1 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,817,005
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#851
of 1,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,231
of 322,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#22
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,218 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,616 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.