Journal of Global Optimization

, Volume 40, Issue 1–3, pp 261–275 | Cite as

A network efficiency measure with application to critical infrastructure networks



In this paper, we demonstrate how a new network performance/efficiency measure, which captures demands, flows, costs, and behavior on networks, can be used to assess the importance of network components and their rankings. We provide new results regarding the measure, which we refer to as the Nagurney–Qiang measure, or, simply, the N–Q measure, and a previously proposed one, which did not explicitly consider demands and flows. We apply both measures to such critical infrastructure networks as transportation networks and the Internet and further explore the new measure through an application to an electric power generation and distribution network in the form of a supply chain. The Nagurney and Qiang network performance/efficiency measure that captures flows and behavior can identify which network components, that is, nodes and links, have the greatest impact in terms of their removal and, hence, are important from both vulnerability as well as security standpoints.


Network efficiency measure Network component importance ranking Braess Paradox Transportation networks Internet Electric power supply chain networks Infrastructure networks Network vulnerability Critical infrastructure protection 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Beckmann M.J., McGuire C.B., Winsten C.B. (1956). Studies in the Economics of Transportation. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bertsekas D.P., Gafni E.M. (1982). Projection methods for variational inequalities with application to the traffic assignment problem. Math. Program. Study 17: 139–159 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Braess D. (1968). Uber ein paradoxon aus der verkehrsplaning. Unternehmenforschung 12: 258–268 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Braess D., Nagurney A., Wakolbinger T. (2005). On a paradox of traffic planning, Translation of the 1968 Article by Braess. Trans. Sci. 39: 446–450 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dafermos S.C. (1980). Traffic equilibrium and variational inequalities. Trans. Sci. 14: 42–54 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dafermos S.C., Sparrow F.T. (1969). The traffic assignment problem for a general network. J. Res. Nat. Bur. Stand. 73: 91–118 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jenelius E., Petersen T., Mattsson L.G. (2006). Road network vulnerability: identifying important links and exposed regions. Trans. Res. A 40: 537–560 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Latora V., Marchiori M.: Efficient behavior of small-world networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (Article No. 198701) (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Latora V., Marchiori M. (2003). Economic small-world behavior in weighted networks. Eur. Phys. J. B 32: 249–263 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Latora V., Marchiori M. (2004). How the science of complex networks can help developing strategies against terrorism. Chaos, Soliton Frac. 20: 69–75 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu Z., Nagurney A.: Financial networks with intermediation and transportation network equilibria: a supernetwork equivalence and reinterpretation of the equilibrium conditions with computations. Comput. Manage. Sci. 4, 243–281 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Murray-Tuite P.M., Mahmassani H.S. (2004). Methodology for determining vulnerable links in a transportation network. Trans. Res. Record 1882: 88–96 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nagurney A. (1999). Network Economics: A Variational Inequality Approach, Second and Revised Edition. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nagurney A. (2006). Supply Chain Networks Economics: Dynamics of Prices, Flows and Profits. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, England Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nagurney, A., Qiang, Q.: A Network Efficiency Measure for Congested Networks. Europhys. Lett. (2007) (in press),Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nagurney A., Zhang D. (1996). Projected Dynamical Systems and Variational Inequalities with Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nagurney, A., Liu, Z., Cojocaru, M.-G., Daniele, P.: Dynamic electric power supply chains and transportation networks: an evolutionary variational inequality formulation. Trans. Res. Europhys. Lett. (2007) (in press) 43, 624–646 (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nagurney, A., Parkes, D., Daniele, P.: The Internet, evolutionary variational inequalities, and the time-dependent Braess Paradox. Comput.Manage. Sci. see also: (2006) (in press)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Newman M. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Rev. 45: 167–256 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Patriksson M. (1994). The Traffic Assignment Problem—Models and Methods. VSP, BV, Utrecht, The Netherlands Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Roughgarden T. (2005). Selfish Routing and the Price of Anarchy. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Smith M. (1979). Existence, uniqueness and stability of traffic equilibria. Trans. Res. B 13: 259–304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wardrop J.G.: Some theoretical aspects of road traffic research. In Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers, Part II, pp. 325–378 (1952)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Watts D.J., Strogatz S.H. (1998). Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature 393: 440–442 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wu K., Nagurney A., Liu Z., Stranlund J.K. (2006). Modeling generator power plant portfolios and pollution taxes in electric power supply chain networks: a transportation network equilibrium transformation. Trans. Res. D 11: 171–190 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Isenberg School of ManagementUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations