Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 53 references

Sectoral inter-dependencies drive the loss of structural balance in signed financial networks

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Loss of structural balance in financial networks is driven by conflicts between sectors, not within them.

desk verdict Solid mesoscopic decomposition with one load-bearing 3-sigma threshold that needs a sensitivity sweep before the central claim is fully trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.12023 v1 pith:PIV7GHJC submitted 2026-08-12 physics.soc-ph q-fin.GNq-fin.RM

Kartik Dahake , Abhijit Chakraborty This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.soc-phq-fin.GNq-fin.RM
keywords structuralbalancesignednetworkspolarizationsystemicriskfinancialrandommatrixtheorysectoraldecompositionS&P500
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 claims that when the S&P 500 loses structural balance during a systemic crisis, the loss is concentrated at the boundaries between economic sectors rather than inside them. Using 14 years of daily returns, the authors build signed networks from noise-filtered correlation matrices and track a triadic polarization measure, decomposing it into intra-sector and inter-sector parts. They find that intra-sector triads stay largely balanced even through crashes, while inter-sector frustrated triads accumulate and mirror the global decline in polarization. The result matters because it locates the mesoscopic origin of systemic risk in the market's sectoral organization, suggesting that monitoring inter-sector conflict could reveal instability before it fully propagates.

What carries the argument

The signed network is derived from the group component of the return cross-correlation matrix, obtained by random-matrix filtering: eigenvalues outside the Marchenko-Pastur bulk, excluding the largest market mode, reconstruct $C_{\mathrm{group}}$, and entries of $C_{\mathrm{group}}$ are thresholded at $\mu_{\mathrm{random}} \pm 3\sigma_{\mathrm{random}}$ to assign positive, negative, or zero edges. Structural balance is quantified by the polarization order parameter $P=(N_+ - N_-)/(N_+ + N_-)$, where $N_\pm$ are the counts of balanced and frustrated triads, and the key identity is the decomposition $P_G = P_G^{\mathrm{intra}} W_G^{\mathrm{intra}} + P_G^{\mathrm{inter}} W_G^{\mathrm{inter}}$, which attributes global imbalance to intra- versus inter-sector triads.

What would settle it

Recompute the full intra/inter decomposition of $P_G$ with Eq. (10) thresholds of $2\sigma_{\mathrm{random}}$ and $4\sigma_{\mathrm{random}}$ on the same 56 windows; if the inter-sector component no longer tracks the global decline (or if intra-sector polarization drops as much as inter-sector), the paper's central conclusion fails. A second check is to run the identical pipeline on sector labels randomly permuted across stocks; if inter-sector dominance persists under shuffled labels, the effect is a density artifact rather than a sectoral one.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the crisis-time loss of global structural balance is a between-sector phenomenon: global polarization $P_G$ drops during the COVID-19 crash because triads spanning two or more sectors become frustrated, while triads within single sectors remain overwhelmingly balanced ($P^{\mathrm{intra}}\approx 1$ in most sectors). The paper demonstrates this by writing $P_G$ as a weighted sum of intra- and inter-sector polarizations, $P_G = P_G^{\mathrm{intra}} W_G^{\mathrm{intra}} + P_G^{\mathrm{inter}} W_G^{\mathrm{inter}}$, and showing that the temporal decline of $P_G$ is mirrored by $P_G^{\mathrm{inter}}$ but not by $P_G^{\mathrm{intra}}$. The same pattern is found in the 2008 financial crisis, though the COVID-19 period uniquely shows intra-sector frustrated triads, which the authors attribute to the exogenous, lockdown-driven nature of the shock. Finally, a multiple linear regression on the maximum of the supply-chain pressure index and the standard deviation of CPI explains about 68% of the variance in global polarization.

Load-bearing premise

The signed network in Eq. (10) is defined by a single threshold at $\mu_{\mathrm{random}} \pm 3\sigma_{\mathrm{random}}$ using the off-diagonal statistics of the random component $C_{\mathrm{random}}$, and every triad count and polarization measure depends on that one choice; no sensitivity analysis is given for other thresholds, and the anti-Wishart extension of the Marchenko-Pastur bound is assumed to hold exactly enough to isolate the group modes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Global polarization can be monitored in real time as a continuous indicator of structural stress, with inter-sector polarization serving as the leading component that drops before the market-wide index does.
  • Sectoral boundaries are the natural fault lines of the financial network: during crises, cooperation within sectors persists even when those sectors' prices are falling sharply.
  • The COVID-19 crisis and the 2008 financial crisis leave distinguishable triadic signatures, so the decomposition can be used to classify the nature of a systemic shock (exogenous vs endogenous) from correlation data alone.
  • Macroeconomic stress such as supply-chain pressure and inflation uncertainty is statistically associated with the measured loss of balance, tying the structural signature to measurable economic conditions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Changing the threshold in Eq. (10) from $3\sigma_{\mathrm{random}}$ to $2\sigma_{\mathrm{random}}$ or $4\sigma_{\mathrm{random}}$ would test whether the sector-boundary conclusion is an artifact of the single ad-hoc cutoff; the paper provides no such sensitivity analysis.
  • The same decomposition could be applied directly to foreign-exchange or cryptocurrency networks, but only if those markets admit a stable sector or community partition; without one, the inter-sector interpretation is not defined.
  • The regression result is a statistical association rather than causal evidence: supply-chain disruptions and inflation uncertainty could both be driven by the same underlying shock that also reshapes correlations.
  • A testable extension is to examine whether inter-sector polarization Granger-causes the S&P 500 index or realized volatility, which would indicate whether the structural signature leads the crisis rather than merely accompanying it.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes the temporal evolution of structural balance in signed networks constructed from S&P 500 return correlations over 2010-2024, with a parallel analysis of the 2008 GFC period in the SI. After filtering the empirical correlation matrix into global, group, and random components via Random Matrix Theory, the authors threshold the group correlation matrix at the mean of the random component plus or minus three standard deviations to build signed networks. They compute global, intra-sector, and inter-sector triadic polarization, and decompose the global polarization into a weighted sum of intra- and inter-sector components. The central claim is that during systemic risk, particularly the COVID-19 crisis, the loss of structural balance is driven predominantly by frustrated triads spanning different sectors, while intra-sector structures remain largely balanced. The paper validates the polarization values with two null models and relates global polarization to supply chain pressure and inflation uncertainty through a multiple linear regression.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper provides a useful mesoscopic account of how structural balance is lost in financial networks: frustration concentrates at sector boundaries while sectors themselves remain internally coherent. The algebraic decomposition in Eq. (16) is exact by construction, and the paper gains credibility from the use of two distinct null models (signed degree-preserving rewiring and the signed topology-preserving maximum-entropy model) and from validation on an independent 2008 GFC dataset. The regression results and the COVID-versus-GFC comparison in terms of intra-sector negative edge density are also interesting. However, the principal empirical conclusion depends on an unexamined threshold choice in the signed-network construction, and the attribution of imbalance to inter-sector effects is not tested against a baseline that preserves the sector-block structure or the naturally large number of inter-sector triads. These issues are fixable but require additional analysis; I therefore recommend major revision rather than rejection.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2.3, Eq. (10)] The signed adjacency matrix is defined by thresholding C_group at μ_random ± 3σ_random, where μ_random and σ_random are the mean and standard deviation of the off-diagonal entries of C_random. Every quantity central to the paper—N_+, N_-, P_G, P_intra, P_inter, and the weights in Eq. (16)—is a deterministic function of this single, ad-hoc threshold. No sensitivity analysis is provided in the main text or the SI: a 2σ or 4σ threshold, or a quantile-based threshold, may change the set of positive and negative edges, and it cannot be assumed a priori that the intra/inter decomposition remains qualitatively unchanged. Because entries of C_group are not independent of C_random and the threshold is not calibrated to a controlled false-positive rate, the central claim that imbalance arises predominantly from inter-sector rather than intra-sector frustration currently rests on an unexamined choice. Please add a systematic threshold sweep and demonstrate that the temporal patterns, the COVID dip, and the GFC comparison are robust.
  2. [§3.3, Eq. (18)] The null-model analysis in Fig. 9 shows that the empirical polarization values are statistically far from sign-randomized ensembles, but it does not directly test the attribution claim. The z-scores are computed for each polarization metric separately, and the null models rewire signs while approximately preserving topology and degree; they do not preserve the sector-block structure of the signs. Consequently, the analysis does not test whether P_inter is significantly lower than P_intra, nor does it control for the fact that inter-sector triads vastly outnumber intra-sector triads by pure combinatorics. A sector-label-preserving null (for example, randomizing edge signs while fixing the number of positive and negative edges within each sector-pair block) would provide a more direct baseline for the claim that frustration concentrates at sector boundaries. Without such a control, the visual contrast between P_intra ≈ 1 and lower P_inter, while suggestive, is not yet quantified against the natural combinatorial baseline.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.2, paragraph after Fig. 4] The text states that there is a gradual increase in the number of inter-sector frustrated triads N^inter_- but writes the symbol as N^intra_-; the superscript should be corrected to avoid confusion with the intra-sector count discussed in the same paragraph.
  2. [§3.4, Eq. (19)] The regression is based on 56 heavily overlapping windows, and the predictors are window-level summaries selected from two macroeconomic indicators. HAC standard errors are a useful step, but the p-values and confidence intervals should be interpreted with caution because of the overlapping-window induced autocorrelation and the generated-regressor nature of the predictors.
  3. [§4, permutation test on ρ^intra_neg] The permutation test compares the first seven peak values of the intra-sector negative edge density in each crisis period. The selection of exactly seven peak values should be justified as a pre-specified rule, rather than an ex post choice, to avoid concerns about selective window selection.
  4. [SI Text S1.1] The 2008 GFC analysis maps all stocks to the modern 11-sector GICS classification even though Real Estate and Communication Services became standalone sectors only later. The main text notes the static mapping for the COVID analysis, but the SI should state explicitly that the same static modern classification is applied retrospectively and discuss any potential look-ahead bias.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the intra/inter decomposition is an explicit triad-count identity, and the central sectoral claim rests on independent empirical comparisons rather than on fitted or self-referential inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The signed network is built from the RMT-filtered group correlation matrix using the fixed threshold rule in Eq. (10); the 3-sigma threshold is computed from the random component and is not fitted to reproduce any polarization target. The polarization quantities in Eqs. (11)-(14) are direct functions of counted triads, and Eqs. (15)-(17) form an explicit algebraic decomposition: global polarization is expressed as a weighted sum of intra-sector and inter-sector polarizations. This identity does not manufacture the paper's conclusion; the conclusion that inter-sector frustration dominates is an empirical finding based on the separate temporal behaviors of P_intra (remaining high/balanced), P_inter (declining), and P_G in Figures 5, 6, and 8. The null-model analysis in Sec. 3.3 benchmarks these observed values against independent randomized ensembles, and the regression in Sec. 3.4 is presented as an in-sample OLS fit to external macroeconomic variables, not as a first-principles prediction with fitted parameters renamed as outputs. The paper's self-citations are background or methodological references and are not load-bearing: the anti-Wishart/Marchenko-Pastur statement is also supported by the independent result in [31], and the polarization measure is adopted from external work [23]. The skeptic's concern about the unexamined 3-sigma threshold is a legitimate robustness/correctness issue, but it is not circularity: changing the threshold would alter the network and would require rechecking the conclusions, but the analysis does not assume the conclusion it is intended to establish.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the thresholding rule and the anti-Wishart extension, plus the static sector mapping. No new entities are introduced. The regression adds fitted coefficients, but these are not part of the structural claim.

free parameters (4)
  • Signed-network threshold (mu_random +/- 3 sigma_random) = 3 sigma
    Eq. (10) uses a fixed multiplier of 3 on the standard deviation of off-diagonal C_random entries to assign positive, negative, or zero edges. This choice determines the network topology and hence all triad counts; no sensitivity analysis is reported.
  • Window length = T = 252 trading days
    The epoch length is chosen for stationarity; it sets the aspect ratio T/N = 0.59 and hence the anti-Wishart regime.
  • Window overlap = 63 days
    The 63-day overlap yields 56 windows and induces serial correlation between consecutive windows.
  • Regression predictor summaries = GSCPI_max and CPI_std
    The regression in Eq. (19) uses these two window-level summaries; other summaries, such as mean or min, would change the fit. This is an ad hoc modeling choice.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math The Marchenko-Pastur upper bound lambda+ remains analytically valid for the bulk spectrum in the anti-Wishart regime T < N, and the non-zero eigenvalue distribution matches the Wishart case with N and T interchanged.
    Invoked in Section 2.2 and 3.1 to justify extracting global and group modes despite the singular correlation matrix.
  • domain assumption Triadic balance is a sufficient first-order measure of structural balance; longer cycles contribute less to overall balance.
    Section 2.3 relies on this to use only 3-node motifs for polarization.
  • ad hoc to paper The off-diagonal mean and standard deviation of the random component C_random provide a valid null baseline for thresholding the group correlations.
    Eq. (10) uses mu_random +/- 3 sigma_random; this is a heuristic with no theoretical justification that the random component is the appropriate noise floor for the group component.
  • domain assumption A static GICS sector mapping is a valid mesoscopic grouping across the entire 2010-2024 study period.
    Section 2.1 fixes sector labels even though GICS is revised annually; the 2005-2015 dataset uses the modern sectors retroactively.
  • domain assumption The 252-day window length provides a good approximation to stationarity.
    Section 2.1, citing reference [27]; this affects the correlation estimates.
  • domain assumption The z-score threshold z > 3 marks statistical significance.
    Section 3.3 uses z > 3 as the significance level for null model departures.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Sectoral inter-dependencies drive the loss of structural balance in signed financial networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PIV7GHJC

@misc{pith2026260812023,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Sectoral inter-dependencies drive the loss of structural balance in signed financial networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PIV7GHJC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.12023}
}
read the original abstract

Signed graphs provide an effective architecture for portraying a system in which cooperation and conflict coexist. Emerging from the concept of balance in psychological sciences, they have found applications across several domains. Financial markets are one such example that can be modeled using signed networks, where assets exhibit correlations in price movements. During periods of systemic risk, such a signed financial network shows a loss of balance, which has been consistently demonstrated. Here, we explore how this structural imbalance is distributed across scales within the financial network, revealing its mesoscopic origin. Adopting the framework of structural balance theory, we use a measure of polarization based on triadic motifs to investigate the distribution of structural imbalance across varying sectoral scales. We analyze the temporal evolution of global polarization and its sectoral constituents using longitudinal data derived from the S&P 500 index. By decomposing global polarization into intra-sectoral and inter-sectoral constituents, we show that structural imbalance arises predominantly from interactions between sectors rather than within them during periods marked by systemic risk. We employ randomization protocols to confirm that observed imbalance configurations are statistically significant and not artifacts of lower-order interactions. We derive a regression equation demonstrating that the variance in global polarization is well explained by macroeconomic variables, indicating that low levels of global polarization during economic crises are driven by compounding pressures from supply chain disruptions and inflation uncertainty. Collectively, these findings provide a quantitative framework for understanding how localized sectoral conflicts propagate across the financial network and contribute to large-scale structural instability during periods of economic crisis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.12023 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Four possible signed triadic configurations in structural balance theory. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of the eigenvalue spectra of the empirical correlation matrix (blue histogram), the Marchenko–Pastur (MP) dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Structure of the largest (u1i) and second-largest eigenvector components (u2i) of the S&P 500 cross-correlation matrix C during the period April 09, 2021–April 06, 2022. Panel (a) displays the eigenvector associated with the largest eigenvalue, and panel (b) displays that associated with the second-largest eigenvalue. Colors denote the sector affiliation of the constituent stocks. A: Basic Materials. B: Communicatio… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Temporal evolution of balanced N(∆Bal) and frustrated N(∆Frust) triads, resolved into intra-sector and inter-sector configurations. (a) shows the total number of balanced triads, N+, along with the numbers of inter-sector (N inter + ) and intra-sector (N intra + ) bala…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Temporal evolution of intra-sector polarization across the 11 GICS sectors. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Temporal evolution of inter-sector polarization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Temporal evolution of global polarization. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Temporal evolution of global polarization components and their corresponding weights. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Temporal evolution of the z-score for the global polarization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Pairwise relationships between global polarization and macroeconomic variables. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Temporal evolution of the fraction of negative intra-sector edges. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    R. N. Mantegna, H. E. Stanley, Introduction to econophysics: correlations and complexity in finance, Cambridge university press, 1999

    1999

  2. [2]

    Gabaix, P

    X. Gabaix, P. Gopikrishnan, V . Plerou, H. E. Stanley, Institutional investors and stock market volatility, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 121 (2) (2006) 461–504

    work page 2006

  3. [3]

    Cont, J.-P

    R. Cont, J.-P. Bouchaud, Herd behavior and aggregate fluctuations in financial markets, Macroeconomic dynam- ics 4 (2) (2000) 170–196

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    Laloux, P

    L. Laloux, P. Cizeau, J.-P. Bouchaud, M. Potters, Noise dressing of financial correlation matrices, Physical review letters 83 (7) (1999) 1467

    1999

  5. [5]

    Plerou, P

    V . Plerou, P. Gopikrishnan, B. Rosenow, L. A. N. Amaral, H. E. Stanley, Universal and nonuniversal properties of cross correlations in financial time series, Physical review letters 83 (7) (1999) 1471

    1999

  6. [6]

    Plerou, P

    V . Plerou, P. Gopikrishnan, B. Rosenow, L. A. N. Amaral, T. Guhr, H. E. Stanley, Random matrix approach to cross correlations in financial data, Physical Review E 65 (6) (2002) 066126

    2002

  7. [7]

    D.-H. Kim, H. Jeong, Systematic analysis of group identification in stock markets, Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 72 (4) (2005) 046133

    work page 2005

  8. [8]

    R. K. Pan, S. Sinha, Collective behavior of stock price movements in an emerging market, Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 76 (4) (2007) 046116

    work page 2007

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    J. Shen, B. Zheng, Cross-correlation in financial dynamics, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 86 (4) (2009) 48005

    2009

  2. [10]

    Battiston, M

    S. Battiston, M. Puliga, R. Kaushik, P. Tasca, G. Caldarelli, Debtrank: Too central to fail? financial networks, the fed and systemic risk, Scientific reports 2 (1) (2012) 541

    2012

  3. [11]

    Chakraborty, T

    A. Chakraborty, T. Reisch, C. Diem, P. Astudillo-Estévez, S. Thurner, Inequality in economic shock exposures across the global firm-level supply network, Nature Communications 15 (1) (2024) 3348

    2024

  4. [12]

    T. Aste, W. Shaw, T. Di Matteo, Correlation structure and dynamics in volatile markets, New Journal of Physics 12 (8) (2010) 085009

    2010

  5. [13]

    Jiang, T

    X. Jiang, T. Chen, B. Zheng, Structure of local interactions in complex financial dynamics, Scientific reports 4 (1) (2014) 5321

    2014

  6. [14]

    Kuyyamudi, A

    C. Kuyyamudi, A. S. Chakrabarti, S. Sinha, Emergence of frustration signals systemic risk, Physical Review E 99 (5) (2019) 052306

    2019

  7. [15]

    Ferreira, S

    E. Ferreira, S. Orbe, J. Ascorbebeitia, B. Álvarez Pereira, E. Estrada, Loss of structural balance in stock markets, Scientific Reports 11 (1) (2021) 12230

    2021

  8. [16]

    Heider, Attitudes and cognitive organization, The Journal of psychology 21 (1) (1946) 107–112

    F. Heider, Attitudes and cognitive organization, The Journal of psychology 21 (1) (1946) 107–112

    1946

  9. [17]

    Cartwright, F

    D. Cartwright, F. Harary, Structural balance: a generalization of heider’s theory., Psychological review 63 (5) (1956) 277

    1956

  10. [18]

    S. A. Marvel, S. H. Strogatz, J. M. Kleinberg, Energy landscape of social balance, Physical review letters 103 (19) (2009) 198701. 17

    2009

  11. [19]

    Zahedian, M

    M. Zahedian, M. Bagherikalhor, A. Trufanov, G. R. Jafari, Financial crisis in the framework of non-zero tem- perature balance theory, PloS one 17 (12) (2022) e0279089

    2022

  12. [20]

    A. M. Belaza, K. Hoefman, J. Ryckebusch, A. Bramson, M. van den Heuvel, K. Schoors, Statistical physics of balance theory, PLoS one 12 (8) (2017) e0183696

    2017

  13. [21]

    Facchetti, G

    G. Facchetti, G. Iacono, C. Altafini, Computing global structural balance in large-scale signed social networks, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (52) (2011) 20953–20958

    2011

  14. [22]

    K. H. Fischer, J. A. Hertz, Spin glasses, no. 1, Cambridge university press, 1993

    1993

  15. [23]

    Minh Pham, I

    T. Minh Pham, I. Kondor, R. Hanel, S. Thurner, The effect of social balance on social fragmentation, Journal of the Royal Society Interface 17 (172) (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Thurner, M

    S. Thurner, M. Hofer, J. Korbel, Why more social interactions lead to more polarization in societies, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 122 (44) (2025) e2517530122

    2025

  17. [25]

    URLhttps://finance.yahoo.com/

    Yahoo Finance, Historical market data, accessed on: December 10, 2025. URLhttps://finance.yahoo.com/

    2025

  18. [26]

    rep., MSCI and S&P Dow Jones Indices (2023)

    MSCI, S&P Dow Jones Indices, Global industry classification standard GICS methodology, Tech. rep., MSCI and S&P Dow Jones Indices (2023). URLhttps://www.msci.com/documents/1296102/11185224/GICS+Methodology+2023.pdf

    2023

  19. [27]

    H. K. Pharasi, K. Sharma, A. Chakraborti, T. H. Seligman, Complex market dynamics in the light of random matrix theory, in: New perspectives and challenges in econophysics and sociophysics, Springer, 2019, pp. 13–34

    2019

  20. [28]

    URLhttps://www.newyorkfed.org/research/policy/gscpi

    Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Global supply chain pressure index (GSCPI), accessed on: June 2026. URLhttps://www.newyorkfed.org/research/policy/gscpi

    2026

  21. [29]

    Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer price index for all urban consumers: All items in U.S

    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer price index for all urban consumers: All items in U.S. city average (CPIAUCSL), accessed on: June 2026. URLhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CPIAUCSL

    2026

  22. [30]

    V . A. Marˇcenko, L. A. Pastur, Distribution of eigenvalues for some sets of random matrices, Mathematics of the USSR-Sbornik 1 (4) (1967) 457–483

    1967

  23. [31]

    P. Vivo, S. N. Majumdar, O. Bohigas, Large deviations of the maximum eigenvalue in wishart random matrices, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 40 (16) (2007) 4317–4337

    2007

  24. [32]

    Diaz-Diaz, E

    F. Diaz-Diaz, E. Candellone, M. A. González-Casado, E. Fraxanet, A. Vendeville, I. Ferri, A. S. Teixeira, Signed networks: theory, methods, and applications, arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17247 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    S. Aref, L. Dinh, R. Rezapour, J. Diesner, Multilevel structural evaluation of signed directed social networks based on balance theory, Scientific reports 10 (1) (2020) 15228

    2020

  26. [34]

    Sinha, U

    S. Sinha, U. Kovur, Uncovering the network structure of the world currency market: Cross-correlations in the fluctuations of daily exchange rates, Econophysics of Agent-Based Models (2013) 203

    2013

  27. [35]

    Balemi, R

    N. Balemi, R. Füss, A. Weigand, Covid-19’s impact on real estate markets: review and outlook, Financial Markets and Portfolio Management 35 (4) (2021) 495

    2021

  28. [36]

    K. Baba, R. Shibata, M. Sibuya, Partial correlation and conditional correlation as measures of conditional inde- pendence, Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics 46 (4) (2004) 657–664

    2004

  29. [37]

    D. Y . Kenett, M. Tumminello, A. Madi, G. Gur-Gershgoren, R. N. Mantegna, E. Ben-Jacob, Dominating clasp of the financial sector revealed by partial correlation analysis of the stock market, PloS one 5 (12) (2010) e15032

    2010

  30. [38]

    Z. T. Kang, P. T.-W. Yen, S. A. Cheong, Indicator from the graph laplacian of stock market time series cross- sections can precisely determine the durations of market crashes, PLoS One 20 (7) (2025) e0327391

    2025

  31. [39]

    Hammond, Geometric observables for financial regime detection, arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.17117 (2026)

    W. Hammond, Geometric observables for financial regime detection, arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.17117 (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Kirkley, G

    A. Kirkley, G. T. Cantwell, M. E. Newman, Balance in signed networks, Physical Review E 99 (1) (2019) 012320

    2019

  33. [41]

    Maslov, K

    S. Maslov, K. Sneppen, Specificity and stability in topology of protein networks, Science 296 (5569) (2002) 910–913. 18

    2002

  34. [42]

    B. Hao, I. A. Kovács, Proper network randomization is key to assessing social balance, Science Advances 10 (18) (2024) eadj0104

    2024

  35. [43]

    B. Hao, B. Kovács, null_model_graphlet: Reference implementation of the signed topology-preserving null model,https://github.com/hbj153/null_model_graphlet(2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    T. M. Pham, A. C. Alexander, J. Korbel, R. Hanel, S. Thurner, Balance and fragmentation in societies with homophily and social balance, Scientific reports 11 (1) (2021) 17188

    2021

  37. [45]

    D. I. Agatón Lombera, D. A. Cardoso López, J. A. López Cabrera, J. A. Nuñez Mora, Market reactions to us financial indices: A comparison of the gfc versus the covid-19 pandemic crisis, Economies 12 (7) (2024) 165

    2024

  38. [46]

    M. M. Martínez-Ramos, M. Vyas, P. Majari, T. H. Seligman, Covid anomaly in the correlation analysis of s&p 500 market states, Plos one 19 (4) (2024) e0301238

    2024

  39. [47]

    Saberi, J

    M. Saberi, J. R. Rieck, S. Golafshan, C. L. Grady, B. Misic, B. T. Dunkley, A. Khatibi, The brain selectively allocates energy to functional brain networks under cognitive control, Scientific Reports 14 (1) (2024) 32032

    2024

  40. [48]

    Saberi, A

    M. Saberi, A. HaqiqiFar, A. Abdolalizadeh, B. Misic, A. Khatibi, Empirical evidence for structural balance theory in functional brain networks, Frontiers in Network Physiology 5 (2025) 1681597

    2025

  41. [49]

    Benigno, J

    G. Benigno, J. Di Giovanni, J. J. Groen, A. I. Noble, The gscpi: A new barometer of global supply chain pressures, FRB of New York StaffReport (1017) (2022)

    2022

  42. [50]

    Nguyen, H.-G

    T.-T. Nguyen, H.-G. Nguyen, J.-Y . Lee, Y .-L. Wang, C.-S. Tsai, The consumer price index prediction using machine learning approaches: Evidence from the united states, Heliyon 9 (10) (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    Chakraborty, S

    A. Chakraborty, S. Easwaran, S. Sinha, Deviations from universality in the fluctuation behavior of a heteroge- neous complex system reveal intrinsic properties of components: The case of the international currency market, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 5...

    2018

  44. [52]

    Chakraborty, S

    A. Chakraborty, S. Easwaran, S. Sinha, Uncovering the hierarchical structure of the international forex market by using similarity metric between the fluctuation distributions of currencies, Acta Physica Polonica 138 (1) (2020) 105–115

    2020

  45. [53]

    Shukla, M

    S. Shukla, M. Peyyala, A. Chakraborty, Time-dependent weighted directed networks of cryptocurrency interac- tion from high-frequency returns, arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.25466 (2026). 19 Supplementary Information SI Text S1. Robustness check: Structural balance during the 2008 g...

    2026 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.