On the robustness of centrality measures under conditions of imperfect data

By Stephen P. Borgatti, Kathleen M. Carley, David Krackhardt. 2006

809 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Sociology and Political Science

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

Is the Sample Good Enough? Comparing Data from Twitter's Streaming API with Twitter's Firehose (2013, background): “In (Borgatti, Carley, and Krackhardt 2006) the authors argue that network measures are stable for denser networks.”
Social network analysis: A methodological introduction (2008, background): “3 Unfortunately , this means that it will be fairly non-robust to error and missing data in certain settings, and that it cannot be sampled from local network data (see, however, Borgatti et al., 2006 and Everett & Borgatti, 2005 for a counterpoint and some pragmatic approximations).”
Social Network Analysis with sna (2008, positive): “…in computation for simulation and inference from exponential random graph processes (see, e.g., Snijders 2002), and have also been used to assess structural robustness (Dodds et al. 2003; Borgatti et al. 2006). eval.edgeperturbation is flexible, and can be used with any graph-level index function.”
Node centrality in weighted networks: Generalizing degree and shortest paths (2010, methodology): “…al.’s (2004) generalization equates two ties with a weight of 1 and a single tie with a weight of 2, and the implementation of Dijkstra’s (1959) shortest path algorithm by Newman (2001) and Brandes (2001) implicitly assumes that the number of intermediary nodes only represent a negligent cost.”
A Critical Review of Centrality Measures in Social Networks (2010, background): “A further contribution to the discussion on the robustness of different CM is provided by Borgatti et al. (2006) who first define four different types of error (adding or deleting an edge or a node) and then compare the CM DC, CC, BC, and EC with regard to these different types of errors.”
Graph theory and networks in Biology. (2006, background): “While there has been some research into this fundamental issue recently [42, 202, 29, 163], more intensive quantitative and theoretical studies are needed before we can reliably apply the techniques discussed here to the problem of essentiality prediction.”
Social network analysis and the evaluation of leadership networks (2010, background): “In order to produce a network map that provides network members with accurate pictures of bridging and bonding, a survey response rate of at least 75% is typically required ( Borgatti et al, 2006 ).”
Social network analysis of animal behaviour : a promising tool for the study of sociality (2008, methodology): “For detailed definitions, formulae and methodology, see Wasserman & Faust (1994), Borgatti et al. (2006b) and Croft et al. (2007).”