Are Word-Adjacency Networks Networks?

Abstract

This article discusses the question of whether word-adjacency relationships are well-represented by a complex network. The main hypothesis of this work is that network representations are best suited to analyze indirect effects. For an indirect effect to occur in a network, a network process needs to exist that uses the network to exert an indirect effect, e.g., the spreading of a virus in a social network after a small group of persons were infected. Given any sequence of words, it can be represented by a so-called word-adjacency network by representing each word by a node and by connecting two nodes if the corresponding words are directly adjacent or at least close to each other in this sequence. It can be easily seen that the result of a speech production process gives rise to a word-adjacency network but it is unlikely that speech production uses an underlying word-adjacency network—at least not in any easily describable way. Thus, the results of clustering algorithms, centrality index values, and the results of other distance-based measures that quantify indirect effects cannot be interpreted with respect to speech production.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Barabási and Albert(1999)]
    Barabási, A.-L., Albert, R.: Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks. Science 286(5439), 509–512 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [Blau(1974)]
    Blau, P.M.: Presidential Address: Parameters of Social Structure. American Sociological Review 39(5), 615–635 (1974)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. [Borgatti(2005)]
    Borgatti, S.P.: Centrality and Network Flow. Social Networks 27, 55–71 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [Borgatti et al.(2009)Borgatti, Mehra, Brass, and Labianca]
    Borgatti, S.P., Mehra, A., Brass, D.J., Labianca, G.: Network Analysis in the Social Sciences. Science 323, 892–895 (2009)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [Cancho and Solé(2001)]
    Cancho, R.F.I., Solé, R.V.: The Small World of Human Language. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 268, 2261–2265 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [Dorn et al.(2012)Dorn, Lindenblatt, and Zweig]
    Dorn, I., Lindenblatt, A., Zweig, K.A.: The Trilemma of Social Network Analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Network Analysis and Mining, Istanbul (2012)Google Scholar
  7. [Freeman(2004)]
    Freeman, L.C.: The Development of Social Network Analysis - A Study in the Sociology of Science. Empirical Press, Vancouver (2004)Google Scholar
  8. [Friedkin(1983)]
    Friedkin, N.E.: Horizons of Observability and Limits of Informal Control in Organizations. Social Forces 62, 54–77 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [Gough(1976)]
    Gough, H.G.: Studying creativity by means of word association tests. Journal of Applied Psychology 61(3), 348–353 (1976)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. [Guimerá et al.(2005)Guimerá, Mossa, Turtschi, and Amaral]
    Guimerá, R., Mossa, S., Turtschi, A., Amaral, L.A.N.: The Worldwide Air Transportation Network: Anomalous Centrality, Community Structure, and Cities’ Global Roles. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences 102, 7794–7799 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [Hick(1952)]
    Hick, W.E.: On the Rate of Gain of Information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 4(1), 11–26 (1952)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [Holme(2003)]
    Holme, P.: Congestion and Centrality in Traffic Flow on Complex Networks. Advances in Complex Systems 6, 163 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. [Koschützki, Lehmann, Peeters, et al.(2005)]
    Koschützki, D., Lehmann, K.A., Peeters, L., Richter, S., Tenfelde-Podehl, D., Zlotowski, O.: Centrality Indices. In: Brandes, U., Erlebach, T. (eds.) Network Analysis. LNCS, vol. 3418, pp. 16–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [Koschützki, Lehmann, Tenfelde-Podehl, et al.(2005)]
    Koschützki, D., Lehmann, K.A., Tenfelde-Podehl, D., Zlotowski, O.: Advanced Centrality Concepts. In: Brandes, U., Erlebach, T. (eds.) Network Analysis. LNCS, vol. 3418, pp. 83–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [Mehler(2008)]
    Mehler, A.: Large Text Networks as an Object of Corpus Linguistic Studies. In: Lüdeling, A., Kytö, M. (eds.) Corpus Linguistics. An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society, pp. 328–382. De Gruyter, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  16. [Milo et al.(2004)Milo, Itzkovitz, Kashtan, Levitt, Shen-Orr, Ayzenshtat, Sheffer, and Alon]
    Milo, R., Itzkovitz, S., Kashtan, N., Levitt, R., Shen-Orr, S., Ayzenshtat, I., Sheffer, M., Alon, U.: Superfamilies of Evolved and Designed Networks. Science 303, 1538–1542 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [Wasserman and Faust(1999)]
    Wasserman, S., Faust, K.: Social Network Analysis – Methods and Applications, revised, reprinted. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  18. [Watts and Strogatz(1998)]
    Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.H.: Collective dynamics of ’smallworld’ networks. Nature 393, 440–442 (1998)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graph Theory and Complex Network Analysis, Department of Computer ScienceTU KaiserslauternKaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations