Abstract

This paper proposes that the “value” of a crowd can be defined in terms of the overall engagement of the individuals within the crowd and that engagement is a function of certain characteristics of the crowds such as small world-ness, sparsity and connectedness. Engagement is hypothesized as messages being exchanged over the complex network which represents the crowd and the “value” is calculated from the entropy of message probability distributions. An initial random network is passed through a process of entropy maximization and the values of some structural properties are recorded with the changing topology to study the corresponding behavior. We show that as the small world-ness and connectedness of a crowd increases and the sparsity decreases, the engagement in the crowd increases.

Keywords

Adjacency Matrix Cluster Coefficient Small World Giant Component Average Short Path 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barabási, A.L., Albert, R.: Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286, 509–512 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caren, N., Gaby, S.: Occupy Online: Facebook and the Spread of Occupy Wall Street (October 24, 2011), SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1943168
  3. 3.
    Demetrius, L.: Robustness and network evolution–an entropic principle. Physica E 346(3-4), 682 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Surowiecki, J.: The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies and Nations. Brown Publishing (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Borge-Holthoefer, J., Rivero, A., García, I.: Structural and Dynamical Patterns on Online Social Networks: The Spanish May 15th Movement as a Case Study. PLOSOne (August 19, 2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anand, K., Bianconi, G.: Phys. Rev. E 80, 45102 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Newman, M.E.J.: The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98, 404–409 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cancho, R.F.I., Sole, R.: Optimization in Complex Networks. Lect. Notes Phys., vol. 625, pp. 114–125 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sole, R.V., Valverde, S.: Information Theory of Complex Networks: On Evolution and Architectural Constraints. Lect. Notes Phys., vol. 650, pp. 189–207 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.H.: Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393, 440–442 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manas S. Hardas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lisa Purvis
    • 1
  1. 1.Spigit, Inc.PleasantonUSA
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentKent State UniversityKentUSA

Personalised recommendations