Analysis of a Network’s Emerging Behaviour via Its Structure Involving Its Strongly Connected Components

  • Jan TreurEmail author
Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 251)


In this chapter, it is addressed how network structure can be related to network behaviour. If such a relation is studied, that usually concerns only strongly connected networks and only linear functions describing the aggregation of multiple impacts. In this chapter both conditions are generalised. General theorems are presented that relate emerging behaviour of a network to the network’s structure characteristics. The network structure characteristics on the one hand concern network connectivity in terms of the network’s strongly connected components and their mutual connections; this generalises the condition of being strongly connected (as addressed in Chap.  11) to a very general condition. On the other hand, the network structure characteristics considered concern aggregation by generalising from linear combination functions to any combination functions that are normalised, monotonic and scalar-free, so that many nonlinear functions are also covered (which also was done in Chap.  11). Thus the contributed theorems generalise existing theorems on the relation between network structure and network behaviour that only address specific cases (such as acyclic networks, fully and strongly connected networks, and theorems addressing only linear functions).


  1. Ashby, W.R.: Design for a Brain: The Origin of Adaptive Behaviour. Chapman and Hall, London, second extended edition (first edition, 1952) (1960)Google Scholar
  2. Bloem, R., Gabow, H.N., Somenzi, F.: An algorithm for strongly connected component analysis in n log n symbolic steps. Form. Meth. Syst. Des. 28, 37–56 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bosse, T., Duell, R., Memon, Z.A., Treur, J., van der Wal, C.N.: Agent-based modelling of emotion contagion in groups. Cogn. Comp. 7(1), 111–136 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, Y.: General spanning trees and reachability query evaluation. In: Desai, B.C. (ed.) Proceedings of the 2nd Canadian Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, C3S2E’09, pp. 243–252. ACM Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  5. Drechsler, R.: Advanced Formal Verification. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fisher, M.S.: Software Verification and Validation: An Engineering and Scientific Approach. Springer Science + Business Media, New York, NY (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Fleischer, L.K., Hendrickson, B., Pınar, A.: On identifying strongly connected components in parallel. In: Rolim J. (ed.) Parallel and Distributed Processing. IPDPS 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1800, pp. 505–511. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  8. Gentilini, R., Piazza, C., Policriti, A.: Computing strongly connected components in a linear number of symbolic steps. In: Proceedings of SODA’03, pp. 573–582 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. Haghighi, R., Namazi, H.: Algorithm for identifying minimum driver nodes based on structural controllability. In: Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2015, Article ID 192307. (2015)
  10. Harary, F., Norman, R.Z., Cartwright, D.: Structural Models: An Introduction to the Theory of Directed Graphs. Wiley, New York (1965)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Kalman, R.E.: Mathematical description of linear dynamical systems. J. Soc. Indus. Appl. Math. Ser. A 1, 152 (1963)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Karlsen, M., Moschoyiannis, S.: Evolution of control with learning classifier systems. Appl. Netw. Sci. 3, 30 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kuich, W.: On the entropy of context-free languages. Inf. Contr. 16, 173–200 (1970)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Łacki, J.: Improved deterministic algorithms for decremental reachability and strongly connected components. ACM Trans. Algorithms 9(3), Article 27 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. Li, G., Zhu, Z., Cong, Z., Yang, F.: Efficient decomposition of strongly connected components on GPUs. J. Syst. Architect. 60(1), 1–10 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lin, C.-T.: Structural controllability. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr. 19, 201–208 (1974)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu, Y.Y., Slotine, J.J., Barabasi, A.L.: Controllability of complex networks. Nature 473, 167–173 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu, Y.Y., Slotine, J.J., Barabasi, A.L.: Control centrality and hierarchical structure in complex networks. PLOS One 7(9), e44459 (2012).
  19. Moschoyiannis, S., Elia, N., Penn, A.S., Lloyd, D.J.B., Knight, C.: A web-based tool for identifying strategic intervention points in complex systems. In: Brihaye, T., Delahaye, B., Jezequel, L., Markey, N., Srba, J. (eds.) Casting Workshop on Games for the Synthesis of Complex Systems and 3rd International Workshop on Synthesis of Complex Parameters (Cassting’16/SynCoP’16). EPTCS, vol. 220, pp. 39–52 (2016)Google Scholar
  20. Port, R.F., van Gelder, T.: Mind as Motion: Explorations in the Dynamics of Cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1995)Google Scholar
  21. Schoenmaker, R., Treur, J., Vetter, B.: A temporal-causal network model for the effect of emotional charge on information sharing. Biol. Inspired Cogn. Arch. 26, 136–144 (2018)Google Scholar
  22. Tarjan, R.: Depth-first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM J. Comput. 1(2), 146–160 (1972)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Treur, J.: Verification of temporal-causal network models by mathematical analysis. Vietnam. J. Comput. Sci. 3, 207–221 (2016a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Treur, J.: Network-Oriented Modeling: Addressing the Complexity of Cognitive, Affective and Social Interactions. Springer Publishers, Berlin (2016b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Treur, J.: On the applicability of network-oriented modeling based on temporal-causal networks: why network models do not just model networks. J. Inf. Telecommun. 1(1), 23–40 (2017)Google Scholar
  26. Treur, J.: Relating emerging network behaviour to network structure. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Complex Networks and their Applications, ComplexNetworks’18, vol. 1. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol. 812, pp. 619–634. Springer Publishers, Berlin (2018a)Google Scholar
  27. Treur, J.: Mathematical analysis of a network’s asymptotic behaviour based on its strongly connected components. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Complex Networks and their Applications, ComplexNetworks’18, vol. 1. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol. 812, pp. 663–679. Springer Publishers, Berlin (2018b)Google Scholar
  28. Treur, J.: The ins and outs of network-oriented modeling: from biological networks and mental networks to social networks and beyond. Trans. Comput. Collect. Intell. 32, 120–139. Paper for Keynote Lecture at ICCCI’18 (2019)Google Scholar
  29. Watts, D.J.: A simple model of global cascades on random networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99(9), 5766–5771 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wijs, A., Katoen, J.P., Bošnacki, D.: Efficient GPU algorithms for parallel decomposition of graphs into strongly connected and maximal end components. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 48, 274–300 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Social AI Group, Department of Computer ScienceVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations