↓ Skip to main content

PAFit: A Statistical Method for Measuring Preferential Attachment in Temporal Complex Networks

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
PAFit: A Statistical Method for Measuring Preferential Attachment in Temporal Complex Networks
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0137796
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thong Pham, Paul Sheridan, Hidetoshi Shimodaira

Abstract

Preferential attachment is a stochastic process that has been proposed to explain certain topological features characteristic of complex networks from diverse domains. The systematic investigation of preferential attachment is an important area of research in network science, not only for the theoretical matter of verifying whether this hypothesized process is operative in real-world networks, but also for the practical insights that follow from knowledge of its functional form. Here we describe a maximum likelihood based estimation method for the measurement of preferential attachment in temporal complex networks. We call the method PAFit, and implement it in an R package of the same name. PAFit constitutes an advance over previous methods primarily because we based it on a nonparametric statistical framework that enables attachment kernel estimation free of any assumptions about its functional form. We show this results in PAFit outperforming the popular methods of Jeong and Newman in Monte Carlo simulations. What is more, we found that the application of PAFit to a publically available Flickr social network dataset yielded clear evidence for a deviation of the attachment kernel from the popularly assumed log-linear form. Independent of our main work, we provide a correction to a consequential error in Newman's original method which had evidently gone unnoticed since its publication over a decade ago.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
India 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Sri Lanka 1 2%
Unknown 58 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 37%
Student > Master 7 11%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Professor 4 6%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 8 13%
Computer Science 7 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Engineering 6 10%
Mathematics 6 10%
Other 19 31%
Unknown 10 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 August 2019.
All research outputs
#2,742,873
of 24,994,150 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#34,012
of 216,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,252
of 278,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#845
of 5,693 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,994,150 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 216,704 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,239 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,693 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.