Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Structural Cohesion: Visualization and Heuristics for Fast Computation

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1503.04476 v1 pith:RDRMBTJB submitted 2015-03-15 cs.SI physics.soc-ph

classification cs.SIphysics.soc-ph
keywords cohesionstructuralnetworksheuristicslargemeasureordertheory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

The structural cohesion model is a powerful theoretical conception of cohesion in social groups, but its diffusion in empirical literature has been hampered by operationalization and computational problems. In this paper we start from the classic definition of structural cohesion as the minimum number of actors who need to be removed in a network in order to disconnect it, and extend it by using average node connectivity as a finer grained measure of cohesion. We present useful heuristics for computing structural cohesion that allow a speed-up of one order of magnitude over the algorithms currently available. We analyze three large collaboration networks (co-maintenance of Debian packages, co-authorship in Nuclear Theory and High-Energy Theory) and show how our approach can help researchers measure structural cohesion in relatively large networks. We also introduce a novel graphical representation of the structural cohesion analysis to quickly spot differences across networks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Experimental Analysis and Evaluation of Cohesive Subgraph Discovery

    cs.SI 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A systematic empirical comparison of 14 cohesive subgraph models shows truss-based and combined models find denser subgraphs, while core-based models return larger, more interpretable ones.

Pith tools