Paper detail

Cascading failures in isotropic and anisotropic spatial networks induced by localized attacks and overloads

In this paper we study the Motter-Lai model of cascading failures induced by overloads in both isotropic and anisotropic spatial networks, generated by placing nodes in a square lattice and using various distributions of link lengths and angles. Anisotropy has not been earlier considered in the Motter-Lai model and is a real feature that may affect the cascading failures. This could reflect the existence of a preferred direction in which a given attribute of the system manifests, such as power lines that follow a city built parallel to the coast. We show that the anisotropy causes a greater spread of damage along the preferential direction of links. We also identify the critical linear size, $l_c$, for a square shaped localized attack, which satisfies with high probability that above $l_c$ the cascading disrupts the giant component of functional nodes, while below $l_c$ the damage does not spread. We find that, for networks with any characteristic link length, their robustness decreases with the strength of the anisotropy. We show that the value of $l_c$ is finite and independent of the system size (for large systems), both for isotropic and anisotropic networks. Thus, in contrast to random attacks, where the critical fraction of nodes that survive the initial attack, $p_c$, is usually below 1, here $p_c = 1$. Note that the analogy to $p_c = 1$ is also found for localized attacks in interdependent spatial networks. Finally, we measure the final distribution of functional cluster sizes and find a power-law behavior, with exponents similar to regular percolation. This indicates that, after the cascade which destroys the giant component, the system is at a percolation critical point. Additionally, we observe a crossover in the value of the distribution exponent, from critical percolation in a two-dimensional lattice for strong spatial embedding, to mean-field percolation for weak embedding.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.