2015
DOI: 10.1109/tcns.2015.2413551
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Notion of Robustness in Complex Networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
97
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 131 publications
(98 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
97
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The plethora of the relevant studies can be divided into two groups: (a) A vast number of studies only consider topological characteristics of networks, such as accessibility, connectivity, shortest path [25][26][27][28][29][30]. What is missing in such approaches is the dynamic of the flow on the network.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The plethora of the relevant studies can be divided into two groups: (a) A vast number of studies only consider topological characteristics of networks, such as accessibility, connectivity, shortest path [25][26][27][28][29][30]. What is missing in such approaches is the dynamic of the flow on the network.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent work has shown that these properties also share thresholds in Erdos-Renyi random graphs [Zhang et al (2015)] and random intersection graphs [Zhao et al (2014)], and our work in this paper adds random k-partite graphs to this list. We identify a bound p r for the probability of inter-layer edge formation p such that for p > p r , random interdependent networks with arbitrary intra-layer topologies are guaranteed to be r-robust asymptotically almost surely.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Due to the prevalence of such networks, their robustness to intentional disruption or natural malfunctions has started to attract attention by a variety of researchers [Schneider et al (2013); Yagan et al (2012); Parandehgheibi and Modiano (2013)]. As we will describe further in the next section, r-robustness has strong connotations for the ability of networks to withstand structural and dynamical disruptions: it guarantees that the network will remain connected even if up to r − 1 nodes are removed from the neighborhood of every node in the network, and facilitates certain consensus dynamics that are resilient to adversarial nodes [LeBlanc et al (2013); Zhao et al (2014); Dibaji and Ishii (2015); Zhang et al (2015); Vaidya et al (2012)]. As we will describe further in the next section, r-robustness has strong connotations for the ability of networks to withstand structural and dynamical disruptions: it guarantees that the network will remain connected even if up to r − 1 nodes are removed from the neighborhood of every node in the network, and facilitates certain consensus dynamics that are resilient to adversarial nodes [LeBlanc et al (2013); Zhao et al (2014); Dibaji and Ishii (2015); Zhang et al (2015); Vaidya et al (2012)].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The unknown dynamics caused by faulty interceptors make the cooperative guidance design for the normal interceptors difficult. Inspired by the time-to-go approximate model in [4] and the notion of network robustness [9]- [11], we integrate a local filtering algorithm with other cooperative guidance law and present a useful robust cooperative guidance law (RCGL). If the misbehavior of faulty interceptors can be characterized by a threat model (each faulty interceptor sends the same value to all of its out-neighbors at each time-step), the RCGL can reduce the variance of impact times between normal interceptors without identifying faulty interceptors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%