Paper detail

Conflicting attachment and the growth of bipartite networks

Simple growth mechanisms have been proposed to explain the emergence of seemingly universal network structures. The widely-studied model of preferential attachment assumes that new nodes are more likely to connect to highly connected nodes. Preferential attachment explains the emergence of scale-free degree distributions within complex networks. Yet, it is incompatible with many network systems, particularly bipartite systems in which two distinct types of agents interact. For example, the addition of new links in a host-parasite system corresponds to the infection of hosts by parasites. Increasing connectivity is beneficial to a parasite and detrimental to a host. Therefore, the overall network connectivity is subject to conflicting pressures. Here, we propose a stochastic network growth model of conflicting attachment, inspired by a particular kind of parasite-host interactions: that of viruses interacting with microbial hosts. The mechanism of network growth includes conflicting preferences to network density as well as costs involved in modifying the network connectivity according to these preferences. We find that the resulting networks exhibit realistic patterns commonly observed in empirical data, including the emergence of nestedness, modularity, and nested-modular structures that exhibit both properties. We study the role of conflicting interests in shaping network structure and assess opportunities to incorporate greater realism in linking growth process to pattern in systems governed by antagonistic and mutualistic interactions.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.