4.6 Article

CDA: A Clustering Degree Based Influential Spreader Identification Algorithm in Weighted Complex Network

期刊

IEEE ACCESS
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 19550-19559

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2822844

关键词

Clustering degree; influential spreaders; weighted complex network

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2016YFB0800700]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61472341, 61772449, 61572420]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Hebei Province China [F2016203330]
  4. Advanced Program of Postdoctoral Scientific Research [B2017003005]
  5. Doctoral Foundation of Yanshan University [B1036]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Identifying the most influential spreaders in a weighted complex network is vital for optimizing utilization of the network structure and promoting the information propagation. Most existing algorithms focus on node centrality, which consider more connectivity than clustering. In this paper, a novel algorithm based on clustering degree algorithm (CDA) is proposed to identify the most influential spreaders in a weighted network. First, the weighted degree of a node is defined according to the node degree and strength. Then, based on the node weighted degree, the clustering degree of a node is calculated in respect to the network topological structure. Finally, the propagation capability of a node is achieved by accounting the clustering degree of the node and the contribution from its neighbors. In order to evaluate the performance of the proposed CDA algorithm, the susceptible-infected-recovered model is adopted to simulate the propagation process in real-world networks. The experiment results have showed that CDA is the most effective algorithm in terms of Kendall's tau coefficient and with the highest accuracy in influential spreader identification compared with other algorithms such as weighted degree centrality, weighted closeness centrality, evidential centrality, and evidential semilocal centrality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据