Traditional models assume a simple rule: people connect with others like them. But our research goes further. We’ve created a model that separates local homophily—strong bonds within close-knit groups—from global homophily, the weaker links across broader communities. This distinction helps explain complex social behaviors and how they impact network dynamics.
Using a maximum entropy approach, our model quantifies these layers of homophily and their influence on networks. One key finding is that different levels of homophily lead to unique percolation behaviors—shifts in how networks stay connected or fragment under certain conditions. We also discovered that these interactions affect critical thresholds for spreading phenomena, from viral outbreaks to information diffusion.
By applying our model to diverse real-world datasets, we demonstrated its ability to capture fine-grained patterns in networks. The insights go beyond theory—they have real implications for designing better public health interventions, optimizing information campaigns, and understanding the role of community structures in amplifying or limiting spread.
So, if you are looking for a network model that distinguishes between [local] homophily within small groups and [global] homophily across larger, more diverse communities, you shall not miss our new pre-print: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.07901
Traditional models assume a simple rule: people connect with others like them. But our research goes further. We’ve created a model that separates local homophily—strong bonds within close-knit groups—from global homophily, the weaker links across broader communities. This distinction helps explain complex social behaviors and how they impact network dynamics.
Using a maximum entropy approach, our model quantifies these layers of homophily and their influence on networks. One key finding is that different levels of homophily lead to unique percolation behaviors—shifts in how networks stay connected or fragment under certain conditions. We also discovered that these interactions affect critical thresholds for spreading phenomena, from viral outbreaks to information diffusion.
By applying our model to diverse real-world datasets, we demonstrated its ability to capture fine-grained patterns in networks. The insights go beyond theory—they have real implications for designing better public health interventions, optimizing information campaigns, and understanding the role of community structures in amplifying or limiting spread.
So, if you are looking for a network model that distinguishes between [local] homophily within small groups and [global] homophily across larger, more diverse communities, you shall not miss our new pre-print: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.07901
BY Complex Systems Studies
Warning: Undefined variable $i in /var/www/group-telegram/post.php on line 260
What distinguishes the app from competitors is its use of what's known as channels: Public or private feeds of photos and videos that can be set up by one person or an organization. The channels have become popular with on-the-ground journalists, aid workers and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who broadcasts on a Telegram channel. The channels can be followed by an unlimited number of people. Unlike Facebook, Twitter and other popular social networks, there is no advertising on Telegram and the flow of information is not driven by an algorithm. Also in the latest update is the ability for users to create a unique @username from the Settings page, providing others with an easy way to contact them via Search or their t.me/username link without sharing their phone number. Telegram has become more interventionist over time, and has steadily increased its efforts to shut down these accounts. But this has also meant that the company has also engaged with lawmakers more generally, although it maintains that it doesn’t do so willingly. For instance, in September 2021, Telegram reportedly blocked a chat bot in support of (Putin critic) Alexei Navalny during Russia’s most recent parliamentary elections. Pavel Durov was quoted at the time saying that the company was obliged to follow a “legitimate” law of the land. He added that as Apple and Google both follow the law, to violate it would give both platforms a reason to boot the messenger from its stores. The channel appears to be part of the broader information war that has developed following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The Kremlin has paid Russian TikTok influencers to push propaganda, according to a Vice News investigation, while ProPublica found that fake Russian fact check videos had been viewed over a million times on Telegram. Emerson Brooking, a disinformation expert at the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, said: "Back in the Wild West period of content moderation, like 2014 or 2015, maybe they could have gotten away with it, but it stands in marked contrast with how other companies run themselves today."
from tr
