Advertisement

Does Location Matter? The Efficiency of Request Propagation Based on Location in Online Social Networks

  • Salem Othman
  • Javed I. Khan
  • Fatema Nafa
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9742)

Abstract

The centrality metrics such as Closeness and Betweenness in Online Social Network (OSN) determine how much end-to-end delay and queue-load of a node can have as a source or as a destination through Social Routing. Experimentally, we find that nodes with high Out-Closeness centrality in OSN suffer from high end-to-end delay as a target, but not as a source. We show that the cause of this end-to-end delay is that most nodes with high Out-Closeness centrality have low In-Closeness centrality. Moreover, we show that the increase in the local In-Degree centrality will increase the global In-Closeness centrality. We also find that the promised level to increase the In-Closeness centrality of a node is its Friends of Friends-Of-Friends (Level-3). An agent-based Model for Social Routing is proposed and a set of large-scale Google+ Graphs are used. A simulation study is also completed by propagating a set of requests in different societies with different routing schemes and diverse queue disciplines, in order to compare the average end-to-end delays from the source and target perspectives.

Keywords

Online social networks Requests Social routing and forwarding Simulation of online social networks Network centrality 

References

  1. 1.
    Barabasi, A.-L.: The origin of bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics. Nature 435(7039), 207–211 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Borgatti, S.P.: Centrality and network flow. Soc. Netw. 27(1), 55–71 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brodka, P., Musial, K., Kazienko, P.: Efficiency of node position calculation in social networks. In: Velásquez, J.D., Ríos, S.A., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C. (eds.) KES 2009, Part II. LNCS, vol. 5712, pp. 455–463. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carrington, P.J., Scott, J., Wasserman, S.: Models and methods in social network analysis, vol. 28. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chapela, V., Criado, R., Moral, S., Romance, M.: Intentional Risk Management Through Complex Networks Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cheng, Y.-Y., Lee, R.K.-W., Lim, E.-P., Zhu, F.: DelayFlow centrality for identifying critical nodes in transportation networks. In: 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM). IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freeman, L.C.: Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Soc. Netw. 1(3), 215–239 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ilyas, M.U., Radha, H.: Identifying influential nodes in online social networks using principal component centrality. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC). IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kang, U., Papadimitriou, S., Sun, J., Tong, H.: Centralities in large networks: algorithms and observations. In: Proceedings of the SIAM International Conference on Data Mining, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karlin, J., Forrest, S., Rexford, J.: Nation-state routing: censorship, wiretapping, and BGP (2009). arXiv preprint arXiv:0903.3218
  11. 11.
    Kayes, I., Qian, X., Skvoretz, J., Iamnitchi, A.: How influential are you: detecting influential bloggers in a blogging community. In: Aberer, K., Flache, A., Jager, W., Liu, L., Tang, J., Guéret, C. (eds.) SocInfo 2012. LNCS, vol. 7710, pp. 29–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim, H., Tang, J., Anderson, R., Mascolo, C.: Centrality prediction in dynamic human contact networks. Comput. Netw. 56(3), 983–996 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klema, V.C., Laub, A.J.: The singular value decomposition: Its computation and some applications. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 25(2), 164–176 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Othman, S., Khan, J.I.: SOR: a protocol for requests dissemination in online social networks. In: Agarwal, N., Xu, K., Osgood, N. (eds.) SocInfo 2012. LNCS, vol. 9021, pp. 394–399. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sporns, O., Honey, C.J., Kötter, R.: Identification and classification of hubs in brain networks. PLoS ONE 2(10), e1049–e1049 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Varga, A.: The OMNeT ++ discrete event simulation system. In: Proceedings of the European simulation Multi-conference (ESM 2001) (2001). SNGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Networking and Media Communication Research Laboratories, Department of Computer ScienceKent State UniversityKentUSA

Personalised recommendations