Abstract
In this paper we establish asymptotics (as the size of the graph grows to infinity) for the expected number of cliques in the Chung–Lu inhomogeneous random graph model in which vertices are assigned independent weights which have tail probabilities \(h^{1-\alpha }l(h)\), where \(\alpha >2\) and l is a slowly varying function. Each pair of vertices is connected by an edge with a probability proportional to the product of the weights of those vertices. We present a complete set of asymptotics for all clique sizes and for all non-integer \(\alpha > 2\). We also explain why the case of an integer \(\alpha \) is different, and present partial results for the asymptotics in that case.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Scale-free networks are ubiquitous in the modern world. In such networks, the number of nodes with degree k decays slowly for large k, so that there are a few nodes with extremely large degrees, even when the average degree is relatively small. In many cases (including the model we consider here) the proportion of nodes with specific degrees behaves similarly to \(k^{-\alpha }\) for some exponent \(\alpha \). The Internet, the IMDB movie collaboration network and even some semantic networks are all said to be examples of such networks [13].
Recall that a clique in a graph is a subset of vertices that form a complete subgraph. In this paper we study how, in a scale-free graph, the expected number of cliques of a given size varies asymptotically as n (the number of nodes) grows, as well as the intrinsically linked probability of a given set of nodes comprising a clique. Janssen, van Leeuwaarden and Shneer [7] have studied this for the power-law exponent in the interval (2, 3). Here we extend those findings to exponents in \((2,\infty )\) to find that the asymptotics not only depend on the clique size k and the power-law exponent \(\alpha \), but also their relation to each other and, in some cases, whether \(\alpha \) is an integer. This provides a baseline, or null, growth rate against which to compare the expected number of cliques in given data or models as a potential measure of connectedness or of community or anti-community structure.
We use the rank-1 inhomogeneous graph model (also known as the hidden-variable model) [3,4,5,6, 8, 9] or, more specifically, the Chung–Lu variant of the rank-1 inhomogeneous graph model [6] with power-law exponent \(\alpha \) in the range \((2,\infty )\). In this model (which is fully described in Sect. 2) each node is assigned a weight from a distribution with close to power-law tails and, conditional on these weights, edges exist independently of each other in such a way that the expected degree of each node is close to its weight [3]. For large enough n this results in the expected degree sequence of the graph matching the close to power-law pattern observed in real world scale-free networks [15]. Further studies into this model have also revealed that degree correlations, average connectivity and clustering coefficients match the observed values of these properties in various real life networks [11, 12].
1.1 Relation to Existing Work
One of the primary difficulties encountered in using this model is the minimum function present in the expression for edge probabilities; see (3) in Sect. 2 below, where the average weight parameter \(\mu \) of the model is also introduced. A way to circumvent this is to truncate the support of the weight distribution at \(\sqrt{\mu n}\), as opposed to the infinite support we use. In [1], Bianconi and Marsili address this case and obtain asymptotics for the clique counts. Notably this cutoff case is identical to one of the ‘extreme cases’ described in Sect. 3 below.
As mentioned above, [7] sees Janssen, van Leeuwaarden and Shneer obtain sharp asymptotics for the weight distribution with infinite support, but restrict their view to power-law exponents in (2, 3). Some of the methodologies used here for power-law exponents in \((2,\infty )\) are generalisations of those seen in that paper.
An alternative line of work is considered by Van der Hofstad et al. [14], who investigate the optimal composition for the most likely subgraph. Notably, they showed that for many subgraphs (including cliques) the optimal composition contains entirely nodes with degree of order \(\sqrt{n}\) and that, up to leading order, said compositions determine how the expected number of copies of a given subgraph varies as n increases. Our results are consistent with these findings, as we see that in the case \(k > \alpha \) the asymptotics correspond to nodes with weights near the boundary \(\sqrt{\mu n}\).
1.2 Outline of This Paper
In Sect. 2, we formally introduce the model we study and some notation we will use throughout the subsequent work. Our main results are stated and proved in Sect. 3, with proofs of some lemmas deferred until Appendix A. The main results of this paper apply in the case where \(\alpha \) is not an integer. Some remarks on this and an investigation of the case of integer \(\alpha \) are given in Sect. 4.
2 Model and Notation
We will be using the Chung–Lu version of the rank-1 inhomogeneous graph model [6] with n nodes. Node i is assigned weight \(H_i\), where \((H_1, H_2, \ldots , H_n)\) is as an i.i.d. sample from a random variable H with tail distribution
for some value \(\alpha \in \left( 2, \infty \right) \) and l(h) which is slowly-varying. Here we define slowly-varying functions in the Karamata sense [2], that is, l is slowly varying if
for all \(\lambda >0\).
A pair of nodes (i, j) with weights \((h_i,h_j)\), conditional on their weights being \(h_i\) and \(h_j\), is connected by an edge, independently of everything else, with probability
where \(\mu = \mathbb {E}(H)\) is a parameter of the model, thought of as an average weight.
We use this model due to its well-known property that the expected degree of a given node, conditional on its own weight, is close to that weight. Hence, we are able to see that for large enough graphs and large enough degrees, the expected degree sequence resembles \(h^{-\alpha }l(h)\) – the ‘close-to power-law’ distribution we would expect from a scale-free graph.
2.1 Notation
We list here some notation that we will use throughout the work that follows. For functions \(f,g:\mathbb {R}\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\),
-
1.
we write \(f(n) \sim g(n)\) if \(\frac{f(n)}{g(n)} \rightarrow 1\) as \(n \rightarrow \infty \).
-
2.
we write \(f(n) \asymp g(n)\) if there exist constants \(n_0 \ge 0\) and \(0< C_1< C_2 < \infty \) such that, for all \(n > n_0\),
$$\begin{aligned} C_1g(n) \le f(n) \le C_2g(n)\,. \end{aligned}$$Note that if \(f(n) \sim Bg(n)\) for some positive constant B, then \(f(n) \asymp g(n)\).
-
3.
we write \(f(n) \lesssim g(n)\) if there exists a constant \(n_0 \ge 0\) and a function h(n) such that, for all \(n > n_0\), \(f(n) \le h(n)\) and \(h(n) \asymp g(n)\).
3 Main Results
In this section we state and prove our main results, asymptotics for the expected number of cliques in the random graph model defined in Sect. 2 above. Let \(A_k(n)\) denote the expected number of cliques of size k in this model. We are interested in how, for fixed \(\alpha \), \(\mu \) and k, and a fixed, slowly-varying function l, \(A_k(n)\) varies asymptotically with n.
Letting \(S_k\) denote the set of all subsets of \(\left\{ 1,2,\ldots , n \right\} \) of size k, \(K_{\textbf {s}}\) denote the event that nodes \(\textbf {s} = \left\{ s_1,s_2,\ldots ,s_k \right\} \) form a clique, and \(K_k\) denote the event that the specific nodes \(\left\{ 1,2,\ldots k \right\} \) form a clique, we note that
where \(\mathbb {I}\left( A \right) \) is an indicator function for the event A. We therefore focus primarily on how \(\mathbb {P}\left( K_k \right) \) varies asymptotically with increasing n.
Our main result is Theorem 1 below. This gives sharp asymptotics for \(\mathbb {P}(K_k)\) in the case where \(\alpha \) is not an integer; we will discuss the case of integer \(\alpha \) in Sect. 4.
Theorem 1
For \(\alpha \in (2,\infty ) \setminus \mathbb {Z}\) and \(k \ge 2\),
The following corollary is immediate from (4).
Corollary 1
For \(\alpha \in (2,\infty ) \setminus \mathbb {Z}\) and \(k \ge 2\),
Notably, we see here that if \(\alpha > 3\) then the average number of cliques of size larger than 3 decreases with n. That is, the graph becomes more and more sparse as it increases in size.
We use the remainder of this section to prove Theorem 1. Recalling (3), note that if \(h_i,h_j \le \sqrt{\mu n}\), then \(p_{i,j}= \frac{h_ih_j}{\mu n}\), and if \(h_i,h_j > \sqrt{\mu n}\) then \(p_{i,j} = 1\), so we may condition on whether the weights of certain nodes are less than or greater than \(\sqrt{\mu n}\). At this stage nodes are interchangeable, so we may condition only on the number of nodes with weights less than or greater than \(\sqrt{\mu n}\). Hence, we can write
where \(I_m = \mathbb {P}\left( K_k, H_i \le \sqrt{\mu n}, H_j > \sqrt{\mu n}, 1 \le i \le m, m < j \le k \right) \). We refer to the first and last terms on the right-hand side of (7) as the ‘extreme cases’ and the remaining terms as the ‘intermediate cases’, as in [7].
Consider the extreme cases, starting with the case where every node has weight greater than \(\sqrt{\mu n}\). Since, in this case, every edge exists with probability 1, we may disregard them altogether to write
For the other extreme case, we are able to calculate the asymptotics directly:
In the last step above we made use of Lemma 1 below. Note that if \(k<\alpha \) then \(n^{\frac{k}{2}(1-k)}\) dominates \(n^{\frac{k}{2}(1-\alpha )}l(\sqrt{n})^k\), so this extreme case asymptotically dominates that considered in (8).
From these arguments, we see that the asymptotics presented in Theorem 1 are at least a lower bound for the asymptotics of \(\mathbb {P}\left( K_k \right) \). In Sect. 3.2 below, we prove that when \(\alpha \) is non-integer, each of the intermediate cases are also bounded above by these asymptotics, so they are also an asymptotic upper bound (and hence a sharp asymptotic) for \(\mathbb {P} \left( K_k \right) \).
3.1 Preliminary Lemmas
Before we consider upper bounds for the intermediate cases, and thus complete the proof of Theorem 1, we first state some useful results, the proofs of which can be found in Appendix A.
Lemma 1
Let \(\alpha ,\beta ,X\) be real constants, l(h) be a slowly varying function which is locally bounded for \(h>h_0\), and x(n) and y(n) be non-decreasing functions such that, for all \(n\ge 1\),
Let \(F(h) = 1 - \overline{F}(h) = 1 - h^{1-\alpha }l(h)\). Then
Definition 1
For integers i and m such that \(1 \le i \le m\), we define the linear functional \(J_{i,m}\) from the set of functions on \((n,h_1,h_2,\ldots ,h_{i-1},h_i)\) to the set of functions on \((n,h_1,h_2,\ldots ,h_{i-1})\) as follows:
where we use the convention that \(h_0 = \sqrt{\mu n}\). We will often write \(J_{i,m}(g)\) instead of \(J_{i,m}(g)(n,h_1,h_2,\ldots ,h_{i-1})\) where it does not create confusion, in order to simplify notation.
We also define linear functional \(\overline{J}_{i,m}\) from the set of functions on
\((n,h_1,h_2,\ldots ,h_m)\) to the set of functions on \((n,h_1,h_2,\ldots ,h_{i-1})\) as
Corollary 2
If
for some positive function B and \(\beta \ne \alpha - 1\), then
Lemma 2
For constant \(\gamma > 0\), slowly varying function l(h) and \(h_i \le \sqrt{\mu n}\)
Lemma 3
If l(x) is a slowly-varying function, then, for any \(a\in \mathbb {R}\) and \(\epsilon > 0\),
Lemma 4
If \(x_1,x_2,\ldots ,x_m \ge 0\) and \(v\ge 1\), then
3.2 Upper Bounds for Theorem 1
To show that the intermediate terms are all asymptotically bounded above by the relevant asymptotics we subdivide the \(I_m\) defined below (7) into two further cases: \(m > \alpha \) and \(m \le \alpha \).
In the case where \(m > \alpha \) (which only occurs when \(k > \alpha \)) we follow the methodology in [7] and consider the subgraph of the k-clique consisting of an m-clique over the nodes whose weights are less than or equal to \(\sqrt{\mu n}\) and a \((k-m)\)-clique over the nodes whose weights are greater than \(\sqrt{\mu n}\). Notably the two cliques in the subgraph are disjoint and independent. Hence,
where, in the penultimate step, we used the results for the extreme cases established above. Hence, if \(m>\alpha \) then \(I_m \lesssim n^{\frac{k}{2}(1-\alpha )}l(\sqrt{n})^k\).
We now consider the case \(m \le \alpha \) and start by making two crucial observations. First, the nodes with weights conditioned to be less than \(\sqrt{\mu n}\) are interchangeable, so without loss of generality we can say that \(1 \le H_m \le H_{m-1} \le \ldots \le H_1 \le \sqrt{\mu n}\). Second, since the remaining nodes all have weights greater that \(\sqrt{\mu n}\) they are connected to each other with probability 1 and connected to the nodes of weight less than or equal to \(\sqrt{\mu n}\) (conditional on the weights of said nodes) independently of each other. Hence we can consider these nodes to be \((k-m)\) independent copies of each other. So, letting \(v=k-m\) for ease of notation, we can write
Hence, in order to show that \(I_m\) is asymptotically less than or equal to the desired function, we only need to show that
We will use the following lemma.
Lemma 5
for some non-negative constants \(C_0, C_1, \ldots , C_m\).
Proof
Noting that if \(h_j > \frac{\mu n}{h_i}\) then \(p_{i,j} = 1\), we see (using the convention that \(h_0 = \sqrt{\mu n}\)),
where \(\mu _s = \mu ^{-(m-s+1)}\). We proceed to show that each of the terms here is asymptotic to one of the terms in (15). Referring to Lemma 1, the asymptotics of each integral term depend on whether \(m-s+1-\alpha \) is greater than or less than \(-1\). The case when \(m-s+1-\alpha = -1\) does not arise since m and s are both integers, and \(\alpha \) is not.
We note that since \(m<\alpha \) then \((m-\alpha )-s+1 < \alpha - 1\) for all \(s \ge 2\), with \(s=1\) being a special case. So, using Lemma 1,
and
The result follows after some manipulation of indices. \(\square \)
We now make use of Lemma 4 and the linearity of \(\overline{J}_{1,m}\) to see that
It remains to show that, depending on k, each of the terms of (17) is asymptotically bounded above by the desired function. We do this via four lemmas.
Lemma 6
For integers \(m,v\ge 1\) such that \(m+v = k > \alpha \) and an integer r such that \(0 \le r \le m-1\),
Proof
We proceed by induction on r. Note that
where we used Corollary 2, Lemma 2 and the fact that \(m+v = k > \alpha \). Similarly, we have
which completes the proof. \(\square \)
Lemma 7
For integers \(m,v\ge 1\) such that \(m+v = k > \alpha \) and an integer s such that \(1 \le s \le m\), let \(\sigma \) be such that \(m+v-\alpha> \sigma > 0\). Then, for an integer r such that \(0 \le r \le m-1\), when \(s < m-r \le m\),
and when \(1 \le m - r \le s\),
Proof
Again we proceed by induction on r. If \(s \ne m\) we use the same methodology as in Lemma 6 to see
Similarly, for r such that \(s < m-r \le m-1\) we can write
Hence the lemma holds for all r such that \(s < m-r \le m\).
We now note that if \(s > 1\) then \(v(s-1)>0\), so we can choose a constant \(\gamma \) such that
We will address the case where \(s=1\) later in this proof.
Note that
Since also \((m-\alpha )(1-v)+\sigma -v\gamma > 0\) and \(\gamma > 0\), we may use Corollary 2, both parts of Lemma 2 and the already proven parts of this lemma to see that
Note that the first line here (and hence all following lines) is consistent with the case where \(s=m\).
Observe that for r such that \(m-r > 1\) we have
So, for r such that \(1\le m-r<s\) we see that
where in the last step we again used Lemma 2. Hence, the lemma holds for \(1\le m-r\le s\) in the case \(s>1\).
In the case where \(s=1\), noting that if l(x) is slowly-varying then so is \(l(x)^v\), we observe from Potter’s Theorem [2, Theorem 1.5.6] that there exist constants \(D_1 ,D_2 >1\) dependent on \(\sigma \) such that
Hence, since \(l(\sqrt{\mu n})>0\) for all \(n\ge 1\),
So we see that
and our lemma holds in this case also. \(\square \)
Lemma 8
For integers \(m,v\ge 1\) such that \(m+v = k < \alpha \) and an integer r such that \(0 \le r \le m-1\),
Proof
Again, we proceed by induction on r:
where we used Corollary 2 and the fact that \(m+v = k < \alpha \). Similarly, we see that for \(1\le r \le m-1\)
as required. \(\square \)
Lemma 9
For integers \(m,v\ge 1\) such that \(m+v = k < \alpha \) and an integer s such that \(1 \le s \le m\), let \(\sigma _1,\sigma _2,\ldots , \sigma _s\) satisfy \(\sigma _s> \sigma _{s-1}> \ldots> \sigma _2> \sigma _1 > 0\) and
Then, for an integer r such that \(0 \le r \le m-1\), when \(s < m-r \le m\),
when \(s-t'+1 < m-r \le s\),
and when \(1 \le m-r \le s-t'+1\),
where \(q = s - m + r\), \(\eta _t = (t-v)(m-\alpha )+v(s-1)-\sigma _t\) and \(t' = \min \left\{ t\ |\ 1 \le t \le s, \eta _t < 0 \right\} \).
Proof
Since \(v \ge 1\) and \(\alpha > k = m + v\), we have \(2v(\alpha -m-v)+v(v-1) > 0\). We also note that
and so the interval
is not empty. Hence \(\sigma _s\) (and by extension \(\sigma _i\) for \(1 \le i \le s-1\)) is well-defined.
Noting that \(\eta _{t+1}-\eta _t = (m-\alpha )+(\sigma _{t}-\sigma _{t+1})< 0\), we see that the \(\eta _t\) form a decreasing sequence. We also see, by the definition of \(\sigma _s\) that
Hence the set \(\left\{ t | 1 \le t \le s, \eta _t < 0 \right\} \) is non-empty, and \(t' \le s\). Since the \(\sigma _i\) are arbitrary within an interval, we can make adjustments to them so that there does not exist a t such that \(\eta _t = 0\).
We proceed again by induction on r. Using Corollary 2 we see that, in the case \(s\ne m\),
Similarly, for r such that \(s< m-r \le m-1\) we have
Hence, the lemma holds for all r such that \(s < m-r \le m\).
Define \(\gamma = \frac{\sigma _1}{v} > 0 \). Note that
so we can continue to use Corollary 2 alongside Lemma 2 to see that
The second line here is consistent with the case where \(s=m\). Recall that \(\sigma _{i+1}-\sigma _{i} >0\) so, in the case \(t' \ne 1\), we may use Lemma 2 to see
Let \(q = s-m+r\). For r such that \(s - t' + 1 < m-r \le s\) we have \( 0 \le q+1 < t'\). So we see that
So, remaining in this case, and continuing to use Corollary 2 and Lemma 2 we have
and thus the lemma holds for all r such that \(s-t'+1< m-r \le s\).
Recall that, by definition, \(\eta _{t'} = (t'-v)(m-\alpha )+v(s-1) - \sigma _{t'} < 0\). Hence, noting that if \(m-r = s - t' + 1\) then \(q = t' - 1\), we see that
Similarly, noting that \(0+m-\alpha < 0\) we see that, for r such that \(1\le m-r <s-t'+1\),
So, the lemma holds for all r such that \(1 \le m-r \le s-t'+1\) and the proof is complete. \(\square \)
Now, returning to (17), in the case \(k > \alpha \) we can use Lemmas 6 and 7 to see that
In the case \(k<\alpha \), we note two things. Firstly,
so \( \frac{v}{2}(1-m-\alpha ) < \frac{m+v}{2}(1-m-v) - \frac{m}{2}(1-m)\) and, using Lemma 3 alongside the property that if l(x) is slowly-varying then so is \(l(x)^a\) for any exponent a, we see that
Secondly we note, for each fixed s, that \(\frac{\sigma _{t'}}{2}< \frac{\sigma _s}{2} < v(\alpha - m - v) + \frac{v}{2}(v-1)\), and so
where we again used Lemma 3 and the fact that if l(x) is slowly-varying then so is \(l(x)^a\). Hence, using Lemmas 8 and 9 on (17) we see that
We see finally that
which completes the proof of Theorem 1 when combined with (7) and our results on the extreme cases obtained above.
4 Results for Integer \(\alpha \)
In the case where \(\alpha \) is an integer, the techniques used above in proving Theorem 1 do not yield sharp asymptotics when \(k \ge \alpha \); see, for example, the proof of Lemma 5 for one step of the proof which breaks down in the case where \(\alpha \) is an integer. We do, however, have asymptotic upper bounds:
Theorem 2
For \(\alpha \in (2,\infty )\cap \mathbb {Z}\) and \(k \ge 2\),
where
for \(x\ge 1\).
Notably, the asymptotics seen in Theorem 1 are still lower bounds for the asymptotics of \(\mathbb {P}\left( K_k \right) \). The corresponding lower bound for the \(k=\alpha \) case (found from the extreme case where every node has weight less than \(\sqrt{\mu n}\)) is \(n^{\frac{k}{2}(1-k)}Q(\sqrt{n})^{k}\).
We note the following useful properties of Q(x):
-
1.
Q(x) is positive and non-decreasing,
-
2.
Q(x) is slowly-varying, and
-
3.
\(l(x) \lesssim Q(x)\).
Closed forms for the asymptotics of Q(x) for a wide class of slowly-varying functions l(h) can be derived from Polfeldt’s results in [10], but a general form for all l(h) is yet to be found.
The full proof of Theorem 2 is omitted here for reasons of brevity, but we shall outline key steps in its proof.
A careful analysis of the proof of Theorem 1 reveals that the only point where we used the assumption that \(\alpha \) was non-integer (other than the assumption that \(k \ne \alpha \)) was in Lemma 5, where we used it to assert that \(m - s + 1 - \alpha \ne - 1\). Note that if both m and s are integers, with \(1 \le m \le \alpha \) and \(1 \le s \le m\), \(m - s + 1 - \alpha = - 1\) only in the cases \(m = \alpha \) (\(s = 2\)) and \(m = \alpha - 1\) (\(s = 1\)). Neither of these cases can arise when \(k < \alpha \), so there the proof of Theorem 1 applies and we obtain a sharp asymptotic for \(\mathbb {P}\left( K_k \right) \).
In the remaining cases we may use the fact that Q(x) is positive and non-decreasing to write
From this relation the asymptotic upper bounds seen in Theorem 2 arise. Note that all the remaining terms (including in the omitted case \(k=\alpha \)) are asymptotically bounded above by the extreme case where every node has weight at most \(\sqrt{\mu n}\).
Setting l(x) to be a specific function sheds more light on the situation. In both examples below it is assumed that \(\alpha \) is some fixed integer.
When \(l(x) = 1\), we have \(Q(x) = (\alpha - 1) \log (x) \asymp \log (x)\) and
When \(l(x) = \log (x)\), we have \(Q(x) = \frac{\alpha - 1}{2} \log (x)^2 - \log (x) \asymp \log (x)^2\) and
The case where \(k > \alpha \) and \(l(x) = \log (x)\) remains as an upper bound since it is unproven whether that bound is attained in all cases. However, using computer methods to fully expand the cumbersome terms appearing in calculations it can be shown that it is attained for certain (relatively) small values of k and \(\alpha \).
These examples show that the upper bound presented in Theorem 2 is not always attained, but asymptotics for \(\mathbb {P}\left( K_k \right) \) when \(\alpha \) is integer may exceed the corresponding asymptotics in the case where \(\alpha \) is non-integer, though they are not guaranteed to do so.
References
Bianconi, G., Marsili, M.: Emergence of large cliques in random scale-free networks. Europhys. Lett. 74(4), 740–746 (2006)
Bingham, N.H., Goldie, C.M., Teugels, J.L.: Regular Variation. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987)
Boguñá, M., Pastor-Satorras, R.: Class of correlated random networks with hidden variables. Phys. Rev. E 68, 036112 (2003)
Bollobás, B., Janson, S., Riordan, O.: The phase transition in inhomogeneous random graphs. Random Struct. Algorithms 31(1), 3–122 (2007)
Britton, T., Deijfen, M., Martin-Löf, A.: Generating simple random graphs with prescribed degree distribution. J. Stat. Phys. 124, 1377–1397 (2006)
Chung, F., Lu, L.: The average distances in random graphs with given expected degrees. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99(25), 15879–15882 (2002)
Janssen, A.J.E.M., van Leeuwaarden, J.S.H., Shneer, S.: Counting cliques and cycles in scale-free inhomogeneous random graphs. J. Stat. Phys. 175(1), 161–184 (2019)
Norros, I., Reittu, H.: On a conditionally Poissonian graph process. Adv. Appl. Probab. 38(1), 59–75 (2006)
Park, J., Newman, M.E.J.: Statistical mechanics of networks. Phys. Rev. E 70, 066117 (2004)
Polfeldt, T.: Integrating regularly varying functions with exponent -1. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 17(5), 904–908 (1969)
Stegehuis, C.: Degree correlations in scale-free null models (2017). arXiv:1709.01085
Stegehuis, C., van der Hofstad, R., Janssen, A.J.E.M., van Leeuwaarden, J.S.H.: Clustering spectrum of scale-free networks. Phys. Rev. E 96, 042309 (2017)
van der Hofstad, R.: Random Graphs and Complex Networks, Volume 1 of Cambridge Series in Statistical and Probabilistic Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2016)
van der Hofstad, R., van Leeuwaarden, J.S.H., Stegehuis, C.: Optimal subgraph structures in scale-free configuration models (2017). arXiv:1709.03466
Voitalov, I., van der Hoorn, P., van der Hofstad, R., Krioukov, D.: Scale-free networks well done. Phys. Rev. Res. 1(3), 033034 (2019)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Communicated by Eric A. Carle.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
A Proofs of lemmas in Section 3.1
A Proofs of lemmas in Section 3.1
Proof (Proof of Lemma 1)
We first note that
So, starting with (10), we can integrate by parts to see that
In the case that \(\beta -\alpha > -1\) we use [2, Proposition 1.5.8] to see that the integral on the right-hand side is asymptotically equivalent to
and using [2, Theorem 1.5.4] we see that \(x^{\beta -\alpha +1} l(x)\) is asymptotic to a non-decreasing function, so it dominates the constant term. Hence the first part of (10) holds.
In the case \(\beta -\alpha < -1\), we first observe, again by [2, Theorem 1.5.4], that \(x^{\beta -\alpha +1} l(x)\) is asymptotic to a non-increasing function, and hence is dominated by the constant term \(X^{\beta -\alpha +1}l(X)\). For the integral term we write
From [2, Proposition 1.5.10] we see that the first term here converges (and hence is a well-defined constant) and the second term is asymptotically equivalent to \(x^{\beta -\alpha +1}l(x)\), and hence dominated by the constant. Hence the second part of (10) holds.
For (11), integrating by parts gives
By [2, Theorem 1.5.4], if \(\beta -\alpha >-1\) then \(\phi (h) = h^{\beta -\alpha +1}l(h)\) is asymptotic to a non-decreasing function, so \(\phi (y)\) dominates \(\phi (x)\). By the same theorem, if \(\beta -\alpha <-1\) then \(\phi (h)\) is asymptotic to a non-increasing function, so \(\phi (x)\) dominates \(\phi (y)\).
We now consider the integral term. If \(\beta -\alpha >-1\), then we write
From this we use [2, Proposition 1.5.8] to see that the first term is asymptotic to \(\phi (y)\) and the second is asymptotic to \(\phi (x)\) (which is dominated by \(\phi (y)\)). Hence the first part of (11) holds.
Similarly, if \(\beta -\alpha <-1\), then we write
From this we use [2, Proposition 1.5.10] to see that the first term is asymptotic to \(\phi (x)\) and the second is asymptotic to \(\phi (y)\) (which is dominated by \(\phi (x)\)). Hence the second part of (11) holds. \(\square \)
Proof (Proof of Corollary 2)
Observe that, since both B and \(h_i^\beta \) are positive for \(h_i \in [1,h_{i-1}]\),
The result then follows from Lemma 1. \(\square \)
Proof (Proof of Lemma 2)
By [2, Theorem 1.5.4] there exists a non-decreasing function \(\phi (x)\) and a non-increasing function \(\psi (x)\) such that
and
\(\square \)
In conclusion, we note that Lemma 3 is a direct corollary of [2, Theorem 1.5.4] and Lemma 4 follows immediately from the convexity of the function \(g(x)=x^v\).
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Haig, A., Daly, F. & Shneer, S. Asymptotics for Cliques in Scale-Free Random Graphs. J Stat Phys 189, 19 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-022-02982-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-022-02982-8