Researcher profile

Peter Niemeyer

Peter Niemeyer contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - Baseline
2works
0followers
2topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2017arXiv

Estimating the sensitivity of centrality measures w.r.t. measurement errors

Most network studies rely on an observed network that differs from the underlying network which is obfuscated by measurement errors. It is well known that such errors can have a severe impact on the reliability of network metrics, especially on centrality measures: a more central node in the observed network might be less central in the underlying network. We introduce a metric for the reliability of centrality measures -- called sensitivity. Given two randomly chosen nodes, the sensitivity means the probability that the more central node in the observed network is also more central in the underlying network. The sensitivity concept relies on the underlying network which is usually not accessible. Therefore, we propose two methods to approximate the sensitivity. The iterative method, which simulates possible underlying networks for the estimation and the imputation method, which uses the sensitivity of the observed network for the estimation. Both methods rely on the observed network and assumptions about the underlying type of measurement error (e.g., the percentage of missing edges or nodes). Our experiments on real-world networks and random graphs show that the iterative method performs well in many cases. In contrast, the imputation method does not yield useful estimations for networks other than Erdős-Rényi graphs.

preprint2014arXiv

Comparing the sensitivity of social networks, web graphs, and random graphs with respect to vertex removal

The sensitivity of networks regarding the removal of vertices has been studied extensively within the last 15 years. A common approach to measure this sensitivity is (i) removing successively vertices by following a specific removal strategy and (ii) comparing the original and the modified network using a specific comparison method. In this paper we apply a wide range of removal strategies and comparison methods in order to study the sensitivity of medium-sized networks from real world and randomly generated networks. In the first part of our study we observe that social networks and web graphs differ in sensitivity. When removing vertices, social networks are robust, web graphs are not. This effect is conclusive with the work of Boldi et al. who analyzed very large networks. For similarly generated random graphs we find that the sensitivity highly depends on the comparison method. The choice of the removal strategy has surprisingly marginal impact on the sensitivity as long as we consider removal strategies implied by common centrality measures. However, it has a strong effect when removing the vertices in random order.