Consistency and differences between centrality measures across distinct classes of networks

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 14; no. 7; p. e0220061
• Main Authors: Oldham, Stuart, Fulcher, Ben, Parkes, Linden, Arnatkevic̆iūtė, Aurina, Suo, Chao, Fornito, Alex
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 26.07.2019; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Analysis; Cluster Analysis; Clustering; Clustering (Computers); Collaboration; Computer and Information Sciences; Correlation; Correlation analysis; Engineering and Technology; Humans; Mental health; Models, Theoretical; Modularity; Multivariate Analysis; Network architectures; Network topologies; Networks; Neural Networks, Computer; Nodes; Physical Sciences; Principal Component Analysis; Principal components analysis; Research and Analysis Methods; Social networks; Social Sciences; Theory; Topology; Australia; Victoria Australia
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220061
• ISSN: 1932-6203

The roles of different nodes within a network are often understood through centrality analysis, which aims to quantify the capacity of a node to influence, or be influenced by, other nodes via its connection topology. Many different centrality measures have been proposed, but the degree to which they offer unique information, and whether it is advantageous to use multiple centrality measures to define node roles, is unclear. Here we calculate correlations between 17 different centrality measures across 212 diverse real-world networks, examine how these correlations relate to variations in network density and global topology, and investigate whether nodes can be clustered into distinct classes according to their centrality profiles. We find that centrality measures are generally positively correlated to each other, the strength of these correlations varies across networks, and network modularity plays a key role in driving these cross-network variations. Data-driven clustering of nodes based on centrality profiles can distinguish different roles, including topological cores of highly central nodes and peripheries of less central nodes. Our findings illustrate how network topology shapes the pattern of correlations between centrality measures and demonstrate how a comparative approach to network centrality can inform the interpretation of nodal roles in complex networks.