1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Effects of weak ties on epidemic predictability on community networks
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.4767955
/content/aip/journal/chaos/22/4/10.1063/1.4767955
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/chaos/22/4/10.1063/1.4767955
View: Figures

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

The mean arrival time and its variability as a function of the degree of the bridge node where the “squares,” “circles,” “triangleups,” “triangledowns,” and “diamonds” denote the cases of the seeds with d = 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. (a) versus , (b) versus . The parameters are chosen as . We perform the experiments on different networks, each of which are tested in independent realizations.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Two spreading pathways through which the bridge node may be infected. The first one is a direct transmission from the seed to the bridge node, and the second one is an indirect transmission from the seed to node i, j, and then to the bridge node.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

At T = 20, the mean prevalence and its variability as a function of the degree of the bridge node where the “squares,” “circles,” “triangleups,” “triangledowns,” and “diamonds” denote the cases of the seeds with d = 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. (a) versus , (b) versus . The parameters are chosen as . We perform the experiments on different networks, each of which are tested in independent realizations.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

When the distance between the initial seed and the bridge node d = 1, the mean arrival time and its variability as a function of the degree of the initial seed, where versus k for (a) and (b), versus k for (c) and (d). The results are averaged over independent realizations on networks.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

When d = 1, the mean prevalence and its variability at T = 20 as a function of the degree of the initial seed, where versus kfor (a) and (b), versus k for (c) and (d). The results are averaged over independent realizations in networks.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

The mean arrival time and its variability as a function of the modularity where the “squares,” “circles,” and “triangles” denote the cases of the bridge seed, the random seed, and the hub seed, respectively. (a) versus , (b) versus . The parameters are chosen as . We perform the experiments on different networks, each of which are tested in independent realizations.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

At T = 2, the mean prevalence and its variability as a function of the modularity where the “squares,” “circles,” and “triangles” denote the cases of the bridge seed, the random seed, and the hub seed, respectively. (a) versus , (b) versus . We perform the experiments on different networks, each of which are tested in independent realizations.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/chaos/22/4/10.1063/1.4767955
2012-11-26
2014-04-18
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Effects of weak ties on epidemic predictability on community networks
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/chaos/22/4/10.1063/1.4767955
10.1063/1.4767955
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM