 |
 |
***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org ***** As a side note, the dataset is actually quite dirty: there are a lot of duplicated names and locations. Many names are listed both with and without honorifics. Many officers are listed both by first name/last name and last name/first name (and some full names also include middle names). There are numerous typos in names. To answer Moses' question, I would suggest treating the whole network as tripartite (officer+intermediary / address / entity) and then project it to get either a network of entities or a network of officers/intermediaries. On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Moses Boudourides < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > I would appreciate if someone is willing to share any ideas about a > meaningful aggregation scheme for relations. Of course, one could > disregard any sort of relational aggregation and treat the network as > a multilayered (multiplex) one, although the size and the complexity > of the Panama Papers network appear to be rather restraining. > -- Dmitry Zinoviev Professor of Computer Science Suffolk University, Boston, MA 02114 _____________________________________________________________________ SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.