Unfolding the Core Structure of the Reciprocal Graph of a Massive Online Social Network

  • Braulio DumbaEmail author
  • Zhi-Li Zhang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10043)


Google+ (G+ in short) is a directed online social network where nodes have either reciprocal (bidirectional) edges or parasocial (one-way) edges. As reciprocal edges represent strong social ties, we study the core structure of the subgraph formed by them, referred to as the reciprocal network of G+. We develop an effective three-step procedure to hierarchically extract and unfold the core structure of this reciprocal network. This procedure builds up and generalizes ideas from the existing k-shell decomposition and clique percolation approaches, and produces higher-level representations of the core structure of the G+ reciprocal network. Our analysis shows that there are seven subgraphs (“communities”) comprising of dense clusters of cliques lying at the center of the core structure of the G+ reciprocal network, through which other communities of cliques are richly connected. Together they form the core to which “peripheral” sparse subgraphs are attached.


Reciprocal network Google+ Network core Reciprocity 



This research was supported in part by DoD ARO MURI Award W911NF-12-1-0385, DTRA grant HDTRA1- 14-1-0040 and NSF grant CNS-1411636. We thank the authors of [6] for the datasets.


  1. 1.
    Gong, N.Z., Xu, W.: Reciprocal versus parasocial relationships in online social networks. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. 4(1), 184–197 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garlaschelli, D., Loffredo, M.I.: Patterns of link reciprocity in directed networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 268–701 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jiang, B., Zhang, Z.-L., Towsley, D.: Reciprocity in social networks with capacity constraints. In: KDD 2015, pp. 457–466. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hai, P.H., Shin, H.: Effective clustering of dense and concentrated online communities. In: Asia-Pacific Web Conference (APWEB) 2010, pp. 133–139. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gong, N.Z., Xu, W., Huang, L., Mittal, P., Stefanov, E., Sekar, V., Song, D.: Evolution of the social-attribute networks: measurements, modeling, and implications using Google+. In: IMC 2015, pp. 131–144. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gonzalez, R., Cuevas, R., Motamedi, R., Rejaie, R., Cuevas, A.: Google+ or Google–? Dissecting the evolution of the new OSN in its first year. In: WWW 2013, pp. 483–494. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., Moon, S.: What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? In: WWW 2010, pp. 591–600. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Magno, G., Comarela, G., Saez-Trumper, D., Cha, M., Almeida, V.: New kid on the block: exploring the Google+ social graph. In: IMC 2012, pp. 159–170. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mislove, A., Marcon, M., Gummadi, K.P., Druschel, P., Bhattacharjee, B.: Measurement and analysis of online social networks. In: IMC 2007, pp. 29–42. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wolfe, A.: Social network analysis: methods and applications. Am. Ethnol. 24(1), 219–220 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jamali, M., Haffari, G., Ester, M.: Modeling the temporal dynamics of social rating networks using bidirectional effects of social relations and rating patterns. In: WWW 2011, pp. 527–536. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li, Y., Zhang, Z.-L., Bao, J.: Mutual or unrequited love: identifying stable clusters in social networks with uni- and bi-directional links. In: Bonato, A., Janssen, J. (eds.) WAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7323, pp. 113–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-30541-2_9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Carmi, S., Havlin, S., Kirkpatrick, S., Shavitt, Y., Shir, E.: A model of Internet topology using k-shell decomposition. PNAS 104, 11150–11154 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Palla, G., Dernyi, I., Farkas, I., Vicsek, T.: Uncovering the overlapping community structure of complex networks in nature and society. Nature 435(7043), 814–818 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Clauset, A., Shalizi, C.R., Newman, M.E.J.: Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Rev. 51, 661–703 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fitting Power Law Distribution.
  19. 19.
    Cazals, F., Karande, C.: A note on the problem of reporting maximal cliques. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 407(1), 564–568 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MinnesotaTwin CitiesUSA

Personalised recommendations