Recent versions of UCINET (last 6 months I think) include a procedure to
calculate edge betweenness. steve.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Newman" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2002 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: link centrality (by analogy with other centrality metrics)
> Dear Ed,
> Yes, you can calculate precisely the thing you describe, and it does
> indeed work very well as a way of finding clusters in many networks.
> The only catch is that you need to recompute betweennesses for edges
> after each one is removed, otherwise the algorithm has some nasty
> pathologies and often produces garbage. The technique is described
> in detail in a paper by Michelle Girvan and myself, which has not
> appeared in print yet, but you can find it online here:
> (I guess you missed Michelle's talk about this work in New Orleans -
> see what you miss if you leave before the end.)
> Best wishes,
> Prof. M. E. J. Newman
> Santa Fe Institute
> Santa Fe, New Mexico
> Ed Vielmetti wrote:
> > I'm experimenting with locating clusters in a network and
> > analyzing a structure for fragility by removing links between
> > pairs of nodes that each have high betweenness. The algorithm
> > is pretty easy; look at the list of nodes ranked by betweenness,
> > determine if the top two nodes have a link, if so snip it; if
> > not, search iteratively through the list for the pair of links
> > with the highest combination.
> > Is there any standard metric that computes link centrality
> > directly? (A reference would be good.) Intuitively it would
> > seem to be the "path that's in the most geodesics in the
> > network", and so it should be just about as hard to compute as
> > node centrality. Google on "link centrality" turns up nothing.
> > The motivation for thinking of links as items in their own right
> > is simply that from telecommunications networks, where the
> > circuit between two devices is the source of at least as much
> > cause for analysis as the endpoints.