Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 80 references

Vulnerable Connectivity Caused by Local Communities in Spatial Networks

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Spatial networks with strong local communities lose connectivity faster under node removal, because short links between clustered nodes create few fragile inter-community bridges.

desk verdict Plausible and carefully executed empirical study of population-based spatial networks, but the headline causal claim that community structure itself weakens robustness is not fully separated from correlated spatial sparsity and degree effects. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.14513 v4 pith:CII74USL submitted 2024-12-19 cs.SI physics.soc-ph

Yingzhou Mou , Yukio Hayashi This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.SIphysics.soc-ph
keywords spatialnetworkscommunitystructurenetworkrobustnesstargetedattacksplanarproximitygraphsrelativeneighborhoodgraphGabrielpopulationdistribution
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that the clustering of nodes into tight local communities makes spatially embedded infrastructure networks more fragile: when nodes are concentrated in dense areas and connected by short links, a few inter-community bridges carry the network, so removing high-betweenness nodes fragments it quickly. The authors model road and communication networks as planar proximity graphs (relative neighborhood graphs and Gabriel graphs) with node locations drawn from Japanese population statistics, then compare the original networks against degree-preserving random rewiring and 2D-lattice relocation. They find a monotone relation: higher modularity $Q$ (stronger local communities) goes with lower robustness index $R_{RB}$ under recalculated-betweenness attacks, and similar losses appear under initial-degree attacks and random failures. If the claim holds, uniform node placement or deliberately added long-distance links would be the levers for making infrastructure more resilient to targeted disruption.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on three measures: modularity $Q$ (the fraction of links that fall within detected communities minus the expected fraction under random linking, estimated here with the Louvain method), the robustness index $R$ (area under the curve of the relative size of the largest connected component as nodes are removed), and the critical fraction $q_c$ (removal fraction at which the second largest component peaks). The comparative machinery is the degree-preserving control: original population-based networks, the same nodes relocated to a 2D lattice, and degree-preserving randomized rewiring are compared under identical degree distributions, so differences in robustness are attributed to node placement and community structure rather than degree sequence.

What would settle it

Take any one of the seven city networks, construct the population-based RNG/GG version, and add long-distance links between communities while keeping the degree distribution fixed; if the robustness index $R_{RB}$ does not increase relative to the original, the paper's claimed mitigation mechanism fails. More directly, if a real or synthetic spatial network with strong local communities shows equal or higher robustness under recalculated-betweenness attacks than a matched uniform network with similar degrees, the central claim would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using relative neighborhood graphs (RNG) and Gabriel graphs (GG) as planar models of road and communication networks, with node locations taken from the 500m × 500m census mesh of seven Japanese urban areas, the paper reports that networks whose nodes are selected by population concentration (Pop.) or inverse concentration (Inv.) have higher modularity and lower robustness than networks with uniformly random node locations (Uni.), even when the degree distributions are nearly identical. Relocating the same nodes onto a 2D lattice (2DL) while preserving degrees weakens community structure and shifts the fragmentation curves rightward, meaning higher robustness index $R$ and larger critical fraction $q_c$. The authors conclude that local communities arising from short links between spatially concentrated nodes weaken robustness against intentional attacks and random failures, and that long-distance links can mitigate this effect.

Load-bearing premise

The whole conclusion rests on the assumption that planar proximity graphs with short links (RNG and GG) capture the connectivity of real road and communication networks well enough that community structure in these models corresponds to community structure in actual infrastructure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Population-concentrated siting of infrastructure nodes lowers resilience to targeted attacks, because few bridge links connect dense local clusters.
  • Under the same degree distribution, uniform node placement is more robust than either extreme population-based placement.
  • Degree-preserving random rewiring consistently improves robustness, confirming that the vulnerability is structural, not a degree-sequence artifact.
  • Gabriel graphs are generally more robust than relative neighborhood graphs, since the extra short links provide redundant connectivity.
  • Adding long-distance inter-community connections is the paper's proposed practical remedy, more feasible than relocating nodes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Inference: the modularity-robustness relation may hold only while inter-community links remain scarce; a network with strong communities but many redundant bridges could violate the monotone trend.
  • Inference: the sparsity index correlation suggests a testable proxy — add long links without increasing modularity, and the robustness gain should come from bridge redundancy, not from reduced clustering alone.
  • Inference: in multilayer or interdependent infrastructure, the same local communities could become chokepoints for cascading failures, so the single-layer result is a lower bound on vulnerability; that is outside the paper's scope.
  • Inference: the finding can be checked against real outage data, e.g., whether cities with stronger detected community structure in road networks fragment into disconnected components after the same fraction of hub removals.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper studies how the spatial concentration of nodes connected by short links (termed local communities) affects the robustness of connectivity in planar spatial networks. It constructs relative neighborhood graphs (RNG) and Gabriel graphs (GG) on node locations drawn from Japanese population data (Pop., Inv., Uni.) and compares them with degree-preserving randomized and 2D-lattice relocated controls. Robustness is measured by the area-under-curve index R and the critical fraction qc under recalculated-betweenness (RB), initial-degree (ID), and random-failure (RF) removals. The main claim is that stronger community structure, measured by modularity Q, weakens robustness, and that long-distance links can mitigate this effect.

Significance. The question addressed is relevant to infrastructure planning, and the study has useful strengths: it uses real demographic data from seven Japanese metropolitan areas, two planar proximity graph models, three network sizes, three removal strategies, and degree-preserving control constructions. The ANOVA results for the RB-attack comparisons are consistent and highly significant for both RNG and GG, giving the paper a solid empirical core. At the same time, the central causal attribution to community structure is not yet isolated from correlated geometric factors, most notably the sparsity index SI and grid-like local structure, and the reported evidence is partly inconsistent across model types (RNG versus GG). Because the conclusion is phrased as a general mechanism rather than as a model-specific association, the manuscript needs additional analysis to support the causal claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, Figs. 5–8 and S13/S14] The load-bearing inference that higher modularity Q leads to lower robustness R_RB is not causally isolated. The original-versus-2DL and original-versus-randomized comparisons simultaneously change the edge-length distribution (hence the sparsity index SI), the spatial point process, and planarity; the 2DL construction explicitly introduces non-planar long links through its second trial. Fig. 7 shows that R_RB decreases with SI, while S14 shows that Q and SI are significantly correlated only in GG (p = 0.0198), not in RNG (p = 0.3315). Moreover, S13 shows that the SI–R_RB correlation is not significant in RNG (p = 0.1486). The observed Q–R relation could therefore be a proxy for SI in GG, while in RNG the claimed monotone relation lacks statistical support. I ask for partial correlations or multivariate regressions of R on Q and SI, or for a spatially constrained rewiring control that preserves edge lengths, to demonstrate that community strength, rather than sparsity or grid-like geometry, is the operative variable.
  2. [§3.3, Tables 4–5 and S9–S10] The general conclusion that Pop.- and Inv.-based networks are weaker than Uni.-based networks under both intentional attacks and random failures is contradicted by two non-significant ANOVA results in RNG: qcID (p = 0.249) and RRF (p = 0.104). The manuscript attributes these exceptions to higher average degree and to grid-like parts, which is an admission that degree and local lattice geometry, not community strength alone, control the outcome in the RNG model—the model used for road networks. Please either restrict the conclusion to GG and to the metrics that are significant, or add an analysis that controls for average degree and the grid-ratio across all three attack types.
  3. [§3.2, text near Figs. 7–8 versus S13/S14] The statement that "The Pearson's correlation tests confirm the relation in both RNG and GG with the significance" is contradicted by S14, where the RNG Q–SI correlation has p = 0.3315. Similarly, the claim that "r < 0 for all cases against RB attacks confirmed these monotone decreasing" overstates the evidence, because in S13 the RNG R_RB–SI correlation has p = 0.1486 and is not significant. Please report all p-values accurately and adjust the conclusions and summary statements accordingly.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Abstract] The sentence "modeling planar infrastructure reveals that the robustness is weakened by strong local communities in spatial networks" is grammatically incomplete and should be reworded, for example as "modeling planar infrastructure, we show that robust connectivity is weakened by strong local communities in spatial networks."
  2. [Throughout] The term "ANOV A" should be written as "ANOVA" (e.g., in Section 3.2, S8–S10 Tables).
  3. [§2.2] The phrase "RB has a strong affect on global fragmentation" should read "effect."
  4. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption states "A monotone decreasing is observed" without reporting any correlation coefficient or significance test; please add the corresponding statistic or cite the table where it is reported.
  5. [Tables 2 and 3] The "Analytical" rows should explicitly cite the source formula from reference [69] and clarify whether the quoted values apply to RNG, GG, or the Uniform baseline.
  6. [§2.2 (2DL construction)] Because the 2DL construction permits non-planar second-trial links while the original networks are planar, the control changes planarity as well as community structure; please state this explicitly as a design limitation.
  7. [Data and code availability] The statement that code is "available from the corresponding author upon request" is not sufficient for reproducibility; please deposit the code in a permanent repository with a versioned DOI.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central Q–R relation is an independent empirical comparison, not a fitted or definitional identity.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and empirical. It constructs spatial networks by placing nodes according to population, inverse-population, or uniform distributions and connecting them with RNG/GG proximity rules. It then measures modularity Q via Louvain community detection and robustness index R / critical fraction qc via node-removal simulations. These are distinct quantities computed independently from the same network: Q is a structural partition statistic, while R and qc are percolation-style responses to node deletion. The central inference—that stronger communities (higher Q) accompany lower robustness—is supported by direct comparisons among original, degree-preserving randomized, and 2D-lattice relocated networks. None of these controls is constructed from the target quantity; the degree distribution is preserved but community structure is weakened by rewiring or relocation, giving an independent contrast. No parameter is fitted to the robustness outcome, and no prediction is defined in terms of its own input. The one self-citation (ref. 21, by co-author Hayashi) is used only as background noting that spatial constraints can weaken connectivity; the paper explicitly says the reason remained unclear and proceeds with its own analysis, so the citation is not load-bearing. Concerns about confounding between spatial sparsity, degree, and modularity are legitimate scientific validity questions, but confounding is not circularity: the observed Q–R relation is not true by construction. Therefore no circular step meets the evidentiary bar of 'Eq. X = Eq. Y by construction' or 'fitted parameter renamed as prediction.'

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on domain assumptions about the validity of planar proximity graph models, the sufficiency of static robustness measures, and the suitability of modularity and relocation controls. No free parameters are fitted and no new entities are postulated.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Planar proximity graphs (RNG, GG) approximate real road and communication networks.
    Section 2.1 states that spatial networks can be approximated by planar networks and that RNG/GG resemble road and communication structures; the study explicitly models these rather than actual network topologies.
  • domain assumption Static structural robustness, measured by LCC size after node removal, captures the vulnerability of infrastructure networks.
    Section 2.2 limits the study to static removal strategies and does not consider cascades, recovery, or other resilience dynamics.
  • domain assumption Rank-based selection of top or bottom population meshes represents realistic extreme node distributions.
    Section 2.2 justifies Pop. and Inv. placements based on heavy-tailed population distributions (S38 Fig).
  • domain assumption Single-layer network abstraction is sufficient to isolate community effects.
    Section 2.1 restricts modeling to single-layer networks, leaving multilayer interactions out of scope.
  • domain assumption Louvain modularity is a valid measure of community strength for comparing these networks.
    Section 3.1 acknowledges modularity limitations but argues it is suitable for relative comparisons.
  • domain assumption The 2D lattice relocation preserves degree distributions while removing spatial clustering.
    Section 2.2 describes the 2DL construction with two trials for link assignments; the paper assumes this isolates the effect of node locations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Vulnerable Connectivity Caused by Local Communities in Spatial Networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CII74USL

@misc{pith2026241214513,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Vulnerable Connectivity Caused by Local Communities in Spatial Networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CII74USL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.14513}
}
read the original abstract

Local communities by concentration of nodes connected with short links are widely observed in spatial networks. However, how such structure affects robustness of connectivity against malicious attacks remains unclear. This study investigates the impact of local communities on the robustness by modeling planar infrastructure reveals that the robustness is weakened by strong local communities in spatial networks. These results highlight the potential of long-distance links in mitigating the negative effects of local community on the robustness.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.14513 by the authors.

Figure 6
Figure 6. Moreover, by comparing cross and triangle marks for each of the node’s [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of connection constraints for (a) RNG and (b) GG. A link colored by red is established between two nodes colored by blue, when no other node exists within the shaded area [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Coverage diagram of radio waves between two base stations in wireless communication. The ranges of strong beams are shown by blue and orange shades. The center circle represents the signal interference area. If other base stations exist within it, the two stations cannot be connected. April 24, 2025 29/67 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Visualization of community structure in (left) RNG and (right) GG (a)(b) as the original and (c)(d) after 10% nodes removal for Tokyo with N = 1024 nodes located decreasing order of population (Pop.). Note that RNG is a subgraph of GG. Different communities detected by…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visualization of community structure in (left) RNG and (right) GG (a)(b)as the original and (c)(d) after 10% nodes removal for Tokyo with N = 1024 nodes located inverse decreasing order of population (Inv.). Note that RNG is a subgraph of GG. Different communities dete…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Relation between modularity Q and robustness index RRB in networks with N = 1024 nodes of 7 Japanese areas against RB attacks. Each point represents the values of RRB and Q for the original (triangles) and 2D lattice (crosses) networks with node’s locations based on Po…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Degree distributions P (k) in the original Tokyo networks with N = 1024 and with node’s locations based on Pop., Inv., and Uni.. All cases have bell-shaped forms with peaks around k = 2 to 4. 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Sparsity Index (SI) 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 R o b u s t…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Relation between robustness index RRB and sparsity index SI(Gw) for networks with N = 1024 nodes in seven Japanese areas. Each point represents the results for (a) RNG and (b) GG with node’s locations based on Pop. (green), Inv. (red), and Uni. (blue). Colored points s…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Relation between sparsity index SI(Gw) and modularity Q for the networks with N = 1024 nodes in seven Japanese areas. Each point represents the result for (a) RNG and (b) GG with node’s locations based on Pop. (green triangles), Inv. (red squares), or Uni. (blue circle…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Robustness against recalculated betweenness (RB) attacks in Tokyo networks with N = 1024 nodes. For rewired (randomized networks) lines, the rewiring process preserves the original degree distributions. Two measures are applied: (a) (b) the relative size S 1st(q)/N of …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Robustness against recalculated betweenness (RB) attacks in Tokyo networks with N = 1024 nodes. For 2DL (relocated networks) lines, the rewiring process preserves the original degree distributions. Two measures are applied: (a) (b) the relative size S 1st(q)/N of larg…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Modularity and community structure in networks

    Newman ME. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in USA. 2006;103(23):8577–8582. doi:10.1073/pnas.0601602103

    doi:10.1073/pnas.0601602103 2006

  2. [2]

    Community structure in social and biological networks

    Girvan M, Newman ME. Community structure in social and biological networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in USA. 2002;99(12):7821–7826. doi:10.1073/pnas.122653799

    doi:10.1073/pnas.122653799 2002

  3. [3]

    The spatial structure of networks

    Gastner M, Newman M. The spatial structure of networks. The European Physical Journal B. 2006;2(49):247–252. doi:10.1140/epjb/e2006-00046-8

    doi:10.1140/epjb/e2006-00046-8 2006

  4. [4]

    The worldwide air transportation network: Anomalous centrality, community structure, and cities’ global roles

    Guimera R, Mossa S, Turtschi A, Amaral LN. The worldwide air transportation network: Anomalous centrality, community structure, and cities’ global roles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2005;102(22):7794–7799. doi:10.1073/pnas.0407994102

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.0407994102 2005

  5. [5]

    The complex network of global cargo ship movements

    Kaluza P, K¨ olzsch A, Gastner MT, Blasius B. The complex network of global cargo ship movements. Journal of the Royal Society Interface. 2010;7(48):1093–1103. doi:10.1098/rsif.2009.0495

    work page arXiv 2010

  6. [6]

    Finding and Evaluating Community Structures in Spatial Networks

    Wan Y, Tan X, Shu H. Finding and Evaluating Community Structures in Spatial Networks. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2023;12(187):1–20. doi:10.3390/ijgi12050187

    work page doi:10.3390/ijgi12050187 2023

  7. [7]

    On community structure in complex networks: challenges and opportunities

    Cherifi H, Palla G, Szymanski BK, Lu X. On community structure in complex networks: challenges and opportunities. Applied Network Science. 2019;4(1):117. doi:10.1007/s41109-019-0238-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s41109-019-0238-9 2019

  8. [8]

    A comprehensive review of community detection in graphs

    Li J, Lai S, Shuai Z, Tan Y, Jia Y, Yu M, et al. A comprehensive review of community detection in graphs. Neurocomputing. 2024;600:128169. doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2024.128169

    arXiv 2024

Show all 80 references
  1. [9]

    Extracting the hierarchical organization of complex systems

    Sales-Pardo M, Guimer` a R, Moreira AA, Amaral LAN. Extracting the hierarchical organization of complex systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in USA. 2007;104(39):15224–15229. doi:10.1073/pnas.0703740104

    2007 doi

  2. [10]

    Inference and Phase Transitions in the Detection of Modules in Sparse Networks

    Decelle A, Krzakala F, Moore C, Zdeborov´ a L. Inference and Phase Transitions in the Detection of Modules in Sparse Networks. Physical Review Letters. 2011;107(6):065701. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.065701

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    Community detection in graphs

    Fortunato S. Community detection in graphs. Physics Reports. 2010;486(3):75–174. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002

    2010 doi

  4. [12]

    Performance of modularity maximization in practical contexts

    Good BH, de Montjoye YA, Clauset A. Performance of modularity maximization in practical contexts. Phys Rev E. 2010;81:046106. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.81.046106

    2010 doi

  5. [13]

    Statistical mechanics of community detection

    Reichardt J, Bornholdt S. Statistical mechanics of community detection. Physical Review E. 2006;74(1):016110. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.74.016110

    2006 doi

  6. [14]

    Rare-event statistics and modular invariance

    Nechaev SK, Polovnikov K. Rare-event statistics and modular invariance. Physics-Uspekhi. 2018;61(1):99–104. doi:10.3367/UFNe.2017.01.038106. April 24, 2025 16/67

    2018 doi

  7. [15]

    Spectral redemption in clustering sparse networks

    Krzakala F, Moore C, Mossel E, Neeman J, Sly A, Zdeborov´ a L, et al. Spectral redemption in clustering sparse networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in USA. 2013;110(52):20935–20940. doi:10.1073/pnas.1312486110

    2013 doi

  8. [16]

    Non-backtracking walks reveal compartments in sparse chromatin interaction networks

    Polovnikov K, Gorsky A, Nechaev S, Razin SV, Ulianov SV. Non-backtracking walks reveal compartments in sparse chromatin interaction networks. Scientific Reports. 2020;10(1):1–11. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-68182-0

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    Communities in C

    Onuchin AA, Chernizova A V, Lebedev MA, Polovnikov KE. Communities in C. elegans connectome through the prism of non-backtracking walks. Scientific Reports. 2023;13(1):1–13. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-49503-5

    2023 doi

  10. [18]

    Core–periphery organization of the cryptocurrency market inferred by the modularity operator

    Polovnikov K, Kazakov V, Syntulsky S. Core–periphery organization of the cryptocurrency market inferred by the modularity operator. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications. 2020;540:123075. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2019.123075

    2020

  11. [19]

    Critical tipping point distinguishing two types of transitions in modular network structures

    Shai S, Kenett DY, Kenett YN, Faust M, Dobson S, Havlin S. Critical tipping point distinguishing two types of transitions in modular network structures. Physical Review E. 2015;92(6):062805. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.92.062805

    2015 doi

  12. [20]

    Modularity affects the robustness of scale-free model and real-world social networks under betweenness and degree-based node attack

    Nguyen Q, Vu TV, Dinh HD, Cassi D, Scotognella F, Alfieri R, et al. Modularity affects the robustness of scale-free model and real-world social networks under betweenness and degree-based node attack. Applied Network Science. 2021;6:1–21. doi:10.1007/s41109-021-00426-y

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    Improvement of the robustness on geographical networks by adding shortcuts

    Hayashi Y, Matsukubo J. Improvement of the robustness on geographical networks by adding shortcuts. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications. 2007;380:552–562. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2007.02.080

    2007 doi

  14. [22]

    Urban spatial order: Street network orientation, configuration, and entropy

    Boeing G. Urban spatial order: Street network orientation, configuration, and entropy. Applied Network Science. 2019;4(1):1–19. doi:10.1007/s41109-019-0189-1

    2019 doi

  15. [23]

    Complex networks: Structure and dynamics

    Boccaletti S, Latora V, Moreno Y, Chavez M, Hwang DU. Complex networks: Structure and dynamics. Physics Reports. 2006;424(4-5):175–308. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2005.10.009

    2006 doi

  16. [24]

    Planarity and street network representation in urban form analysis

    Boeing G. Planarity and street network representation in urban form analysis. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. 2018;doi:10.1177/2399808318802941

    2018 doi

  17. [25]

    The relative neighbourhood graph of a finite planar set

    Toussaint GT. The relative neighbourhood graph of a finite planar set. Pattern Recognition. 1980;12(4):261–268. doi:10.1016/0031-3203(80)90066-7

    1980 doi

  18. [26]

    A new statistical approach to geographic variation analysis

    Gabriel KR, Sokal RR. A new statistical approach to geographic variation analysis. Systematic Zoology. 1969;18(3):259–278. doi:10.2307/2412323

    1969 doi

  19. [27]

    Spatial Networks: A Complete Introduction: From Graph Theory and Statistical Physics to Real-World Applications

    Barthelemy M. Spatial Networks: A Complete Introduction: From Graph Theory and Statistical Physics to Real-World Applications. Cham: Springer; 2022

    2022

  20. [28]

    Bioevaluation of World Transport Networks

    Adamatzky A, Adamatzky A. Bioevaluation of World Transport Networks. USA: World Scientific Publishing Co., Inc.; 2012

    2012

  21. [29]

    Resilience and efficiency in transportation networks

    Ganin AA, Kitsak M, Marchese D, Keisler JM, Seager TP, Linkov I. Resilience and efficiency in transportation networks. Science Advances. 2017;3(12):e1701079. doi:10.1126/sciadv.1701079. April 24, 2025 17/67

    2017 doi

  22. [30]

    Editorial: Network resilience and robustness: Theory and applications

    Dong G, Duan D, Xia Y. Editorial: Network resilience and robustness: Theory and applications. Frontiers in Physics. 2022;10:972037. doi:10.3389/fphy.2022.972037

    2022

  23. [31]

    Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks

    Buldyrev SV, Parshani R, Paul G, Stanley HE, Havlin S. Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks. Nature. 2010;464(7291):1025–1028. doi:10.1038/nature08932

    2010 doi

  24. [32]

    Structural resilience of spatial networks with inter-links behaving as an external field

    Fan J, Dong G, Shekhtman LM, Zhou D, Meng J, Chen X, et al. Structural resilience of spatial networks with inter-links behaving as an external field. New Journal of Physics. 2018;20:093003. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/aadceb

    2018 doi

  25. [33]

    Spatial association network of economic resilience and its influencing factors: evidence from 31 Chinese provinces

    Wang H, Ge Q. Spatial association network of economic resilience and its influencing factors: evidence from 31 Chinese provinces. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 2023;10(1):290. doi:10.1057/s41599-023-01783-y

    2023 doi

  26. [34]

    Attack vulnerability of complex networks

    Holme P, Kim BJ, Yoon CN, Han SK. Attack vulnerability of complex networks. Physical Review E. 2002;65(5):056109. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.65.056109

    2002 doi

  27. [35]

    Emergence of scaling in random networks

    Barab´ asi AL, Albert R. Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science. 1999;286(5439):509–512. doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509

    1999 doi

  28. [36]

    Error and attack tolerance of complex networks

    Albert R, Jeong H, Barab´ asi AL. Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature. 2000;406(6794):378–382. doi:10.1038/35019019

    2000 doi

  29. [37]

    Morphogenesis of Spatial Networks

    Barthelemy M. Morphogenesis of Spatial Networks. 1st ed. Lecture Notes in Morphogenesis. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018

    2018

  30. [38]

    Navigability of interconnected networks under random failures

    De Domenico M, Sol´ e-Ribalta A, Cozzo E, Kivel¨ a M, Moreno Y, Porter MA, et al. Navigability of interconnected networks under random failures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2014;111(23):8351–8356. doi:10.1073/pnas.1318469111

    2014 doi

  31. [39]

    Interdependent Spatially Embedded Networks: Dynamics at Percolation Threshold

    Danziger MM, Bashan A, Berezin Y, Havlin S. Interdependent Spatially Embedded Networks: Dynamics at Percolation Threshold. In: 2013 International Conference on Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems; 2013. p. 619–625

    2013

  32. [40]

    A Study on Analyzing Road Network Patterns using Proximity Graphs

    Watanabe D. A Study on Analyzing Road Network Patterns using Proximity Graphs. Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan. 2005;40.3:133–138. doi:10.11361/journalcpij.40.3.133

    2005 doi

  33. [41]

    A study on analyzing the grid road network patterns using relative neighborhood graph

    Watanabe D. A study on analyzing the grid road network patterns using relative neighborhood graph. In: The Ninth International Symposium on Operations Research and Its Applications. Lecture Notes in Operations Research. Beijing, China: World Publishing . . . ; 2010. p. 112–119

    2010

  34. [42]

    Routing with guaranteed delivery in ad hoc wireless networks

    Bose P, Morin P, Stojmenovi´ c I, Urrutia J. Routing with guaranteed delivery in ad hoc wireless networks. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Discrete Algorithms and Methods for Mobile Computing and Communications. DIALM ’99. New York, NY, USA: Association fo...

    1999

  35. [43]

    GPSR: greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks

    Karp B, Kung HT. GPSR: greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks. In: Proceedings of the 6th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking. MobiCom ’00. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2000. p. 243–254. April 24, 2025 18/67

    2000

  36. [44]

    Sur la sph` ere vide

    Delaunay B. Sur la sph` ere vide. Izvestia Akademii Nauk SSSR, Otdelenie Matematicheskikh i Estestvennykh Nauk. 1934;7:793–800

    1934

  37. [45]

    Nouvelles applications des param` etres continus ` a la th´ eorie des formes quadratiques: premier m´ emoire

    Voronoi G. Nouvelles applications des param` etres continus ` a la th´ eorie des formes quadratiques: premier m´ emoire. Sur quelques propri´ et´ es des formes quadratiques positives parfaites. Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik. 1908;133:97–178

    1908

  38. [46]

    Modeling environmental effects on directionality in wireless networks

    Anderson E, Phillips C, Sicker D, Grunwald D. Modeling environmental effects on directionality in wireless networks. In: 2009 7th International Symposium on Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc, and Wireless Networks; 2009. p. 1–7

    2009

  39. [47]

    Determining best setup sites for cellular towers using fuzzy logic

    Singh J, Kaur G, Kaur G. Determining best setup sites for cellular towers using fuzzy logic. In: 2015 International Conference on Futuristic Trends on Computational Analysis and Knowledge Management (ABLAZE). IEEE; 2015. p. 256–260

    2015

  40. [48]

    Optimization of base station location in 3G networks using fuzzy clustering and mesh adaptive direct search

    Onim A, Kihato P, Musyoki S. Optimization of base station location in 3G networks using fuzzy clustering and mesh adaptive direct search. In: Proceedings of sustainable research and innovation conference; 2014. p. 30–35

    2014

  41. [49]

    Population density, Census 2021; 2021

    Office for National Statistics. Population density, Census 2021; 2021. Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/maps/choropleth/population/ population-density/population-density/ persons-per-square-kilometre

    2021

  42. [50]

    Notes on the Poisson point process

    Keeler HP. Notes on the Poisson point process. Weierstrass Inst, Berlin, Germany, Technical Report. 2016

    2016

  43. [51]

    Introduction to Solid State Physics

    Kittel C, McEuen P. Introduction to Solid State Physics. 8th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2018

    2018

  44. [52]

    A Set of Measures of Centrality Based on Betweenness

    Freeman LC. A Set of Measures of Centrality Based on Betweenness. Sociometry. 1977;40(1):35–41. doi:10.2307/3033543

    1977 doi

  45. [53]

    Assessing the resilience of complex ecological spatial networks using a cascading failure model

    Xiang Q, Yu H, Huang H, Li F, Ju L, Hu W, et al. Assessing the resilience of complex ecological spatial networks using a cascading failure model. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2024;434:140014. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140014

    2024

  46. [54]

    Li D. 4. In: L¨ u J, Yu X, Chen G, Yu W, editors. Resilience of Spatial Networks. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2016. p. 79–106

    2016

  47. [55]

    Localized attacks on spatially embedded networks with dependencies

    Berezin Y, Bashan A, Danziger MM, Li D, Havlin S. Localized attacks on spatially embedded networks with dependencies. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:8934. doi:10.1038/srep08934

    2015 doi

  48. [56]

    2010 Census of Japan; 2010

    Statistics Bureau of Japan. 2010 Census of Japan; 2010. https://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/kokusei/2010/summary.html

    2010

  49. [57]

    Finding and evaluating community structure in networks

    Newman MEJ, Girvan M. Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Review E. 2004;69(2):026113. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.69.026113

    2004 doi

  50. [58]

    Fast unfolding of communities in large networks

    Blondel VD, Guillaume JL, Lambiotte R, Lefebvre E. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment. 2008;2008(10):P10008. doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008. April 24, 2025 19/67

    2008 doi

  51. [59]

    Detecting hierarchical genome folding with network modularity

    Norton HK, Emerson DJ, Huang H, Kim J, Titus KR, Gu S, et al. Detecting hierarchical genome folding with network modularity. Nature Methods. 2018;15(2):119–122. doi:10.1038/nmeth.4560

    2018 doi

  52. [60]

    On Modularity Clustering

    Brandes U, Delling D, Gaertler M, Gorke R, Hoefer M, Nikoloski Z, et al. On Modularity Clustering. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering. 2008;20(2):172–188. doi:10.1109/TKDE.2007.190689

    2008

  53. [61]

    Mitigation of malicious attacks on networks

    Schneider CM, Moreira AA, Andrade Jr JS, Havlin S, Herrmann HJ. Mitigation of malicious attacks on networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in USA. 2011;108(10):3838–3841. doi:10.1073/pnas.1009440108

    2011 doi

  54. [62]

    Network robustness and fragility: Percolation on random graphs

    Callaway DS, Newman ME, Strogatz SH, Watts DJ. Network robustness and fragility: Percolation on random graphs. Physical Review Letters. 2000;85(25):5468. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5468

    doi

  55. [63]

    Sparsity measure of a network graph: Gini index

    Goswami S, Murthy CA, Das AK. Sparsity measure of a network graph: Gini index. Information Sciences. 2018;462:16–39. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2018.05.044

    2018 doi

  56. [64]

    Sparsity of weighted networks: Measures and applications

    Goswami S, Das AK, Nandy SC. Sparsity of weighted networks: Measures and applications. Information Sciences. 2021;577:557–578. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2021.06.090

    2021 doi

  57. [65]

    Optimal design of spatial distribution networks

    Gastner MT, Newman MEJ. Optimal design of spatial distribution networks. Phys Rev E. 2006;74:016117. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.74.016117

    2006 doi

  58. [66]

    IBM SPSS Statistics; 2024

    IBM Corporation. IBM SPSS Statistics; 2024. Available from: https://www.ibm.com/jp-ja/products/spss-statistics

    2024

  59. [67]

    Statistical Methods for Research Workers

    Fisher RA. Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Oliver and Boyd; 1925

    1925

  60. [68]

    One-way ANOV A using SPSS Statistics; 2015

    Laerd Statistics. One-way ANOV A using SPSS Statistics; 2015. Available from: https://statistics.laerd.com/spss-tutorials/ one-way-anova-using-spss-statistics.php

    2015

  61. [69]

    Fragmentation properties of two-dimensional proximity graphs considering random failures and targeted attacks

    Norrenbrock C, Melchert O, Hartmann AK. Fragmentation properties of two-dimensional proximity graphs considering random failures and targeted attacks. Physical Review E. 2016;94(6):062125. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.94.062125

    2016 doi

  62. [70]

    Introduction To Percolation Theory: Second Edition

    Stauffer D, Aharony A. Introduction To Percolation Theory: Second Edition. 2nd ed. London: Taylor & Francis; 1992

    1992

  63. [71]

    Identifying optimal targets of network attack by belief propagation

    Mugisha S, Zhou HJ. Identifying optimal targets of network attack by belief propagation. Phys Rev E. 2016;94:012305. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.94.012305

    2016 doi

  64. [72]

    Influence maximization in complex networks through optimal percolation

    Morone F, Makse H. Influence maximization in complex networks through optimal percolation. Nature. 2015;524:65–68. doi:10.1038/nature14604

    2015 doi

  65. [73]

    Review on modeling and simulation of interdependent critical infrastructure systems

    Ouyang M. Review on modeling and simulation of interdependent critical infrastructure systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety. 2014;121:43–60. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2013.06.040

    2014 doi

  66. [74]

    Generic metrics and quantitative approaches for system resilience as a function of time

    Henry D, Emmanuel Ramirez-Marquez J. Generic metrics and quantitative approaches for system resilience as a function of time. Reliability Engineering & System Safety. 2012;99:114–122. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2011.09.002

    2012 doi

  67. [75]

    A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities

    Bruneau M, Chang SE, Eguchi RT, Lee GC, O’Rourke TD, Reinhorn AM, et al. A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities. Earthquake Spectra. 2003;19(4):733–752. doi:10.1193/1.1623497. April 24, 2025 20/67

    2003 doi

  68. [76]

    Modeling the multi-layer nature of the European Air Transport Network: Resilience and passengers re-scheduling under random failures

    Cardillo A, Zanin M, G´ omez-Garde˜ nes J, Romance M, Papo D, del Pozo F, et al. Modeling the multi-layer nature of the European Air Transport Network: Resilience and passengers re-scheduling under random failures. The European Physical Journal Special Topics. 2013;215(1):23–3...

    2013 doi

  69. [77]

    Two distinct percolation transitions in interdependent networks

    Danziger MM, Bonamassa I, Boccaletti S, Havlin S. Two distinct percolation transitions in interdependent networks. EPL (Europhysics Letters). 2016;115(3):36002. doi:10.1209/0295-5075/115/36002

    2016 doi

  70. [78]

    Regional Mesh Statistics: First Regional Division, 2010 Population Census (World Geodetic System)

    Danziger MM, Bashan A, Havlin S. Interdependent resistor networks with process-based dependency. New Journal of Physics. 2015;17(4):043046. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/4/043046. April 24, 2025 21/67 Supporting Information S1 Fig fukuokadescend 1024 community 2in1.pdf : Visualizat...

    2015 doi

  71. [79]

    Yingzhou MOU (Corresponding author) Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Nomi-city, Ishikawa 923-1292, Japan E-mail: mouyingzhou@outlook.com

  72. [80]

    Illustration of connection constraints for (a) RNG and (b) GG

    Yukio HAYASHI Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Nomi-city, Ishikawa 923-1292, Japan E-mail: yhayashi@jaist.ac.jp April 24, 2025 28/67 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 (a) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 (...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.