Firsts in network science

I revised this post after comments from Urska Demsar, Travis Gibson, Des Higham, Mason Porter, Max Schich, Jan Peter Schäfermeyer, Johan Ugander, and Jean-Gabriel Young. Thanks! Our field is interdisciplinary, and many smart people have been thinking about similar things. No wonder things get reinvented and rediscovered many times. I don’t think science is a […]

Steak-pun networks: The state of affairs

This is a comment on the recent arxiv by Voitalov, van der Hoorn, van der Hofstad, and Krioukov titled Scale-free networks well done, and the ongoing debate of scale-free networks. As usual, I take a laid-back spectator position—no papers, no research of my own, just another blog post of my personal reading of this contribution […]

Hierarchies and networks

We, scientists, love the word “hierarchy.” In every professor, it evokes a picture of us chalking up a pyramid on the blackboard and confidently explaining “at the top, we have the …” Hierarchies are systematic and meaningful orderings. They are the successful ends of research projects, bringers of peace to our curious minds. They connect […]

Ridiculograms: A ridiculous dialogue

If you’re a network scientist, or you’ve hung around with one, you’ve probably heard about ridiculograms. It’s a tongue-in-cheek derogative word for plots of huge networks intended to impress by their complexity. I have a vague memory of someone crediting Marc Vidal for coining it. In this blog post, we will explore if they really […]

Less is more

igatnvestIn this blog post, I will explore why network science is mostly a science of large networks and argue that studying small networks can be just as rewarding and challenging as studying large ones. In other words, a manifesto for small-network science. (But a modest one, because it is not going to be any main […]