|
From: Laszlo G. <lg...@ai...> - 2005-07-25 11:33:22
|
Hi, Back in 2001 I was in e-mail correspondence with Prof. Barabasi, and asked the same question. His answer was that they were always using a fully connected initial network, even though 'it should work' with other configurations, too. I hope this helps, -- g --=20 Gulyas Laszlo | Laszlo Gulyas kut.ig. | dir. of research AITIA Rt. | AITIA Inc. <quote who=3D"Bj=F6rn Lijnema"> > Hello everyone, > > I managed to find some time to write the Barabasi-Albert network > generator I mentioned on this list a few weeks back. (Actually I > called it a scale free network generator, but Laszlo Gulyas pointed > out my error). I'm afraid it was a bit of a rush job, but I think it > should work correctly. > > There is one issue though, in Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks > Barabasi and Albert say that the network can have a small number of > initial vertices, however they do not mention anything about > connecting those initial vertices to each other. > > This would mean, with their formula (the probability formula of the > probability for a new vertex being connected to an existing vertex i > being the number of i's edges divided by the total number of edges) > that you will get unconnected vertices if the number of initial > vertices is not equal to the number of edges each vertex has. > > Of the initial vertices, those that do not have a connection after the > first new vertex has been connected, will never get one since the > probability that a new vertex will connect to them is always zero. > > I chose to just connect all initial nodes to each other, mainly > because I really didn't know what to do. I noticed that JUNG > (jung.sf.net) chose another way to go, by changing p =3D degree(v) / |E= | > to p =3D (degree(v) + 1) / (|E| + |V|) > > > If someone could look over my code and point out/correct any errors > I've made, and make suggestions for the initial nodes problem, I would > be most thankful. > > > Bj=F6rn Lijnema > |