Paper detail

Average path length for Sierpinski pentagon

In this paper,we investigate diameter and average path length(APL) of Sierpinski pentagon based on its recursive construction and self-similar structure.We find that the diameter of Sierpinski pentagon is just the shortest path lengths between two nodes of generation 0. Deriving and solving the linear homogenous recurrence relation the diameter satisfies, we obtain rigorous solution for the diameter. We also obtain approximate solution for APL of Sierpinski pentagon, both diameter and APL grow approximately as a power-law function of network order $N(t)$, with the exponent equals $\frac{\ln(1+\sqrt{3})}{\ln(5)}$. Although the solution for APL is approximate,it is trusted because we have calculated all items of APL accurately except for the compensation($Δ_{t}$) of total distances between non-adjacent branches($Λ_t^{1,3}$), which is obtained approximately by least-squares curve fitting. The compensation($Δ_{t}$) is only a small part of total distances between non-adjacent branches($Λ_t^{1,3}$) and has little effect on APL. Further more,using the data obtained by iteration to test the fitting results, we find the relative error for $Δ_{t}$ is less than $10^{-7}$, hence the approximate solution for average path length is almost accurate.

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.