arxiv: v3 [physics.soc-ph] 14 Mar 2014

Transcription

1 Structural measures for multplex networks arxv: v3 [physcs.soc-ph] 14 Mar 2014 Federco Battston, 1 Vncenzo Ncosa, 1, 2 1, 2, 3 and Vto Latora 1 School of Mathematcal Scences, Queen Mary Unversty of London, London E1 4NS, Unted Kngdom 2 Laboratoro su Sstem Compless, Scuola Superore d Catana, I Catana, Italy 3 Dpartmento d Fsca ed Astronoma, Unverstà d Catana and INFN, I Catana, Italy (Dated: March 17, 2014) Many real-world complex systems consst of a set of elementary unts connected by relatonshps of dfferent knds. All such systems are better descrbed n terms of multplex networks, where the lnks at each layer represent a dfferent type of nteracton between the same set of nodes, rather than n terms of (sngle-layer) networks. In ths paper we present a general framework to descrbe and study multplex networks, whose lnks are ether unweghted or weghted. In partcular we propose a seres of measures to characterze the multplexcty of the systems n terms of: ) basc node and lnk propertes such as the node degree, and the edge overlap and renforcement, ) local propertes such as the clusterng coeffcent and the transtvty, ) global propertes related to the navgablty of the multplex across the dfferent layers. The measures we ntroduce are valdated on a genune multplex data set of Indonesan terrorsts, where nformaton among 78 ndvduals are recorded wth respect to mutual trust, common operatons, exchanged communcatons and busness relatonshps. I. INTRODUCTION Much work has been done n the last decades n nvestgatng and characterzng the structure and dynamcs of complex systems. Many of these systems have been proven to be successfully descrbed as a network whose nodes represent the dfferent basc unts of the system, and whose lnks represent the nteractons/relatonshps among the unts [1 4]. The standard approach to network descrpton of complex systems conssts of studyng the graph resultng from the aggregaton of all the lnks observed between a certan set of elementary unts. However, such aggregaton procedure mght n general dscard mportant nformaton about the structure and functon of the orgnal system, snce n many cases the basc consttuents of a system mght be connected through a varety of relatonshps whch dffer for relevance and meanng [5, 6]. For nstance, the same set of ndvduals n a socal system can be connected through frendshp, collaboraton, knshp, communcaton, commercal and colocaton relatonshps, just to name some of them, whle n complex mult-modal transportaton systems, whch are typcal of large metropoltan areas, a set of locatons mght be reached n several dfferent ways, e.g. usng bus, underground, suburban ral, rverboat networks and the lke. In these systems, each type of nteracton has assocated a gven relevance, mportance, cost, dstance or meanng, so that treatng all the lnks as beng equvalent results nto losng a lot of mportant nformaton. A better descrpton of such systems s n terms of multplex networks,.e. networks where each node appears n a set of dfferent layers, and each layer descrbes all the edges of a gven type. Recently, a consderable amount of effort has been devoted to the characterzaton and modelng of multplex networks, wth the am of creatng a consstent mathematcal framework to study, understand and reproduce the structure of these systems. A number of measures have been proposed n the context of real-world multplex networks such as ar transportaton systems [7] and massve multplayer onlne games [8]. Some other works are pontng towards a statstcal mechancs formulaton of multplex networks [9], to the extenson of classcal network metrcs to the case of multplexes [10, 11] and to model the growth of systems of ths knd [12]. Fnally, another actve research drecton s that of characterzng the dynamcs and the emergent propertes of mult-layer systems, especally wth respect to epdemc [13] and nformaton spreadng [14, 15], cooperaton [16], synchronzaton [17], dffuson processes [18] and random walks on multplex networks [19]. A revew of recent papers n ths feld can be found n Ref. [20]. In ths artcle we ntroduce a set of basc metrcs to characterze the structural propertes of multplex networks, ncludng ther degree dstrbutons, edge overlap, node clusterng, spectral centralty, confguraton of shortest paths, betweenness and closeness centralty. In partcular, we focus on the quantfcaton of the partcpaton of sngle nodes to the structure of each layer, and of the mportance of each node for the overall effcency of the multplex network, n terms of node reachablty and tradc closure. All the proposed measures are tested and valdated on a genunely multplex real-world data set, the Top Noordn Terrorst Network, whch ncludes detaled nformaton about four dfferent features, namely mutual trust, common operatons, exchanged communcatons and busness nvolvement of 78 Indonesan terrorsts. Thanks to ts pecular structure, ths system can be naturally modeled as a four-layer multplex. We show that, n ths partcular data set, one of the four

2 2 layers, namely the trust layer, acts as a drver for the others, snce the condtonal probablty for two terrorsts to communcate or to partcpate to the same operaton clearly depends on the strength of ther mutual trust relatonshp. Ths result can be explaned n terms of socal renforcement, and reveals mportant detals about the overall dynamcs of edge formaton and strengthenng n the multplex. We beleve that the measures proposed hereby wll have wde applcablty to larger multplexes n several dfferent domans. The artcle s organzed n the followng way. In Secton II we dscuss the varous levels at whch we can descrbe a multplex network. We ntroduce the aggregated topologcal matrx, the overlappng and the weghted overlappng matrx, and the vector of adjacency matrces A, whch provdes a complete descrpton of the multplex network. We also dscuss basc metrcs, ncludng node degree and edge overlap. In Secton III we ntroduce the mult-layer system under study, a multplex network wth four layers descrbng the nteractons among 78 Indonesan terrorsts. In Secton IV we compare the dfferent measures of node degree on the network under study and we ntroduce metrcs to descrbe how the lnks of a node are dstrbuted over the varous layers. In Secton V we quantfy the edge overlap and we dscuss a mechansm of socal renforcement present n the network of terrorsts. In Secton VI we generalze the concepts of clusterng and transtvty to the case of multplex networks, consderng the possblty of trangles wth lnks n dfferent layers. In Secton VII we nvestgate the number of shortest paths whch make use of lnks n dfferent layers. In Secton VIII we propose a smple extenson of spectral centralty to networks wth multple layers. Fnally, n Secton IX we present our conclusons. II. GENERAL FORMALISM Consder a complex system nvolvng multple knds of relatons among ts basc unts. When t s possble to dstngush the nature of the tes, an effectve approach to descrbe the system conssts n embeddng the edges n dfferent layers accordng to ther type. Ths s the startng pont of multplex networks analyss. In ths secton we propose a comprehensve approach and a coherent notaton for the study of systems composed of N nodes and M layers, wth tes n each layer beng undrected and ether unweghted or weghted [21]. Our framework does not ft, nstead, the case of a multplex of multplexes,.e. a system n whch each layer s composed by a number of sub-layers (whch may n turn be composed by several sub-sub-layers, and so on.), but mght be easly extended to encompass ths case. We consder frst a system composed of N nodes and M unweghted layers, and we extend the notaton to the case of weghted layers afterwards. We can assocate to each layer α, α = 1,..., M, an adjacency matrx A [α] = {a [α] j }, where a [α] j = 1 f node and node j are connected through a lnk on layer α, so that each of the M layers s an unweghted network. Such a multplex system s completely specfed by the vector of the adjacency matrces of the M layers A = {A [1],..., A [M] }. (1) We defne the degree of a node on a gven layer as k [α] = j a[α] j, from whch follows that 0 k[α] N 1, α. Consequently, the degree of node n a multplex network s the vector k = (k [1],..., k [M] ), = 1,..., N (2) We have k[α] = 2K [α], where K [α] s the total number of lnks on layer α. As for sngle-layer networks, we use lowercase letters to denote node propertes and captal letters for propertes obtaned by summng over the nodes or the edges, ether at the level of sngle layer or at the level of the whole system. Vectoral varables, such as A and k, are necessary to properly store all the rchness of multplex networks. However, t s also useful to defne aggregated adjacency matrces (n whch we dsregard the fact that the lnks belongs to dfferent layers) to be used as a term of comparson. As part of the goal of ths paper, we wll show that aggregated matrces and the correspondng aggregated measures wth whch one may be tempted to analyze the mult-layer structure have lmted potental and often fal n detectng the key structural features of a multplex network. We defne the aggregated topologcal adjacency matrx A = {a j } of a multplex network, where { 1 f α : a [α] a j = j = 1 (3) 0 otherwse Ths s the adjacency matrx of the unweghted network obtaned from the mult-layer structure jonng all pars of nodes and j whch are connected by an edge n at least one layer of the multplex network, and neglectng the possble exstence of mult-tes between a par of nodes and the nature of each te as well. For the degree of node on the aggregated topologcal network, we have k = j a j. (4) Summng k over all elements of the system, we obtan k = 2K, (5) where K s the total number of lnks (also called the sze) of the aggregated topologcal network. Matrx A descrbes a sngle-layer bnary network whch can be studed usng the well-establshed set of measures defned for sngle-layer networks. As we wll show n the followng

3 3 sectons, ths representaton turns out to be very smplstc and often nsuffcent to unvel the key features of mult-layer systems. A basc feature whch s lost n the topologcal aggregated matrx s that n multplex systems the same par of nodes can be connected by tes of dfferent knds. We ntroduce the edge overlap of edge j between two layers α and α as: o [α,α ] j and the edge overlap of edge j as: = a [α] j + a[α ] j, (6) o j = α a [α] j. (7) By defnton, we have 0 o j M, j. We can now defne the aggregated overlappng adjacency matrx O = {o j }. Matrx O s not dfferent from a standard weghted adjacency matrx of a sngle-layer network. Even though the overlappng matrx O has a rcher structure compared to the purely topologcal matrx A, n ths paper we show that also ths matrx eventually fals n featurng a number of basc structural propertes of multplex networks. In fact, although the nformaton about the total number of connectons (at dfferent layers) between each par of nodes s preserved, the loss of knowledge n dentfyng the nature of each te (whch s nstead conserved n a vectoral varable such as A) wll often make O nsuffcent to catch mportant characterstcs of mult-structured systems. Based on the edge overlap o j, we can also defne the overlappng degree of node as: o = j o j = α k [α]. (8) wth o k. Slghtly dfferent measures of node overlappng where defned n [9]. Notce that the overlappng degree o represents the correct factor to normalze the components of the degree vector k. In fact, we have (1/o ) α k[α] = 1. Summng o over all elements of the system, we obtan: o = α k [α] = 2 α K [α] = 2O, (9) where O s the sze of the overlappng network. We now consder the case of a multplex network composed of weghted layers. In such a case, for all the connected pars of nodes and j on each layer α of the multplex, we have a postve real number w [α] j, namely the weght of the lnk j at layer α. A weghted multlayer network s completely specfed by the vector of ts weghted adjacency matrces W = {W [1],..., W [M] }, wth W [α] = {w [α] j }. In analogy wth the case of unweghted layers, also for weghted layers we can defne the aggregated topologcal adjacency matrx A = {a j }, where { 1 f α : w [α] a j = j > 0 (10) 0 otherwse. We can now extend all the prevously ntroduced measures to the case of weghted multplexes. We defne the strength of node on layer α as s [α] = j w[α] j. Smlarly to the unweghted case, the strength of node can be represented as a vector s = (s [1],..., s [M] ), = 1,..., N (11) Summng over the elements of the multplex, we obtan s[α] = 2S [α], where S [α] s the total strength of layer α. We also defne the weghted overlap of edge j as o w j = α w [α] j, (12) and, consequently, the weghted aggregated overlappng adjacency matrx O w = {o w j }. We can also compute the weghted overlappng degree of node as o w = j o w j = α s [α]. (13) Summng over all nodes, we obtan o w = s [α] = 2 S [α] = 2O w, (14) α α where O w s the sze of the weghted overlappng network,.e. the total number of edges n the multplex. We would lke to stress once more that the superposton of dfferent layers wth lnks of dfferent types confers a non-neglgble added value to mult-layered systems, whch s lost by consderng exclusvely the aggregated matrces A and O. As we wll show n n Sectons IV- VIII, a proper descrpton of basc multplex quanttes such as degree, node clusterng and reachablty, cannot dsregard the explct or mplct presence of the layer ndex α, and of vectoral varables lke k and A. III. THE MULTI-LAYER NETWORK OF INDONESIAN TERRORISTS As a case of study, n ths work we focus on the multple relatons among Indonesan terrorsts belongng to the so-called Noordn Top Terrorst Network [22]. Ths data set ncludes nformaton about trust (T), operatonal (O), communcaton (C) tes and busness (B) relatons among a group of 78 terrorsts from Indonesa actve n recent years. In ths data set, nformaton for some of the layers can be splt nto a deeper level. Ths s the case of the trust and operatonal networks whch are composed by four sub-layers each, makng them multplexes nsde a multplex. Layer T s obtaned as superposton of classmates, frendshp, knshp and soul-mates tes, whle layer O can be splt nto logstc, meetngs, operatons and tranng sub-layers. As a frst approach we represent ths system as a multplex network wth M = 4

4 4 LAYER CODE N act K S O O w MULTIPLEX M / TRUST T / / Classmates Tc / / / Frendshp Tf / / / Knshp Tk / / / Soulmates Ts 9 11 / / / OPERATIONAL O / / Logstc Ol / / / Meetngs Om / / / Operatons Oo / / / Tranng Ot / / / COMMUNICATION C / / BUSINESS B / / TABLE I. The Top Noordn Terrorst Network ncludes data about trust (T), operatons (O), communcaton (C) and busness (B) among 78 terrorsts actve n recent years n Indonesa. Trust and operatonal networks are characterzed by a deeper nternal structure, and they can be dvded nto four sub-layers each. For the multplex network (M), and each layer and sub-layer we show the total number of actve nodes N act, and the number of edges expressed as non-overlappng lnks K, overlappng lnks O and weghted overlappng lnks O w. For each layer α we also report the total strength S [α]. layers, namely T, O, C and B. We explot the addtonal rchness of the data set to assgn a weght to the lnks connectng nodes n layers T and O, whle we leave the analyss of multplexes of multplexes for future work. In partcular, we assocated an nteger number w [T] j wth 1 w [T ] j 4 to every edge n the trust layer, based on how many tmes the connecton appears n the four correspondng sub-layers. Analogously, an nteger weght w [O] j wth 1 w [O] j 4 s assocated to every edge n the operatonal layer. For most of the followng analyss we wll consder also T and O as unweghted layers, whle we wll make explct use of the weghts of layers T and O n Secton V. Summng up, the multplex network of Top Noordn Terrorsts has N = 78 nodes, K = 623 non-overlappng lnks, O = 911 overlappng lnks and O w = 1014 weghted overlappng lnks. Table I reports more detals about the sze of each layer and sub-layer, and of the correspondng aggregated adjacency matrces. We notce that some ndvduals are not nvolved n all the four layers, meanng that ther actvty wth respect to a partcular knd of socal relatonshp has not been regstered or was unknown at the tme the data set was compled. Consequently, some of the replcas of such nodes wll be solated nodes on one or more of the four layers. It s evdent that whle the trust, communcaton and operatonal layers share approxmately 90% of the nodes, the busness layer has only 13 actve nodes. Consequently, n the followng we wll consder only trust, communcaton and operatonal relatonshps, wth the excepton of Secton V where we > 0). The sze of a node s proportonal to ts overlappng degree o : node 57 s the node wth the largest overlappng degree. FIG. 1. (color onlne) A flattened representaton of the threelayer multplex obtaned by consderng only trust (T), communcaton (C) and operatons tes (O). For each node we ndcate wth a color-code the layers n whch s actvely nvolved (.e., the layers α for whch k [α] wll also brefly dscuss the role of the busness layer. For ths three-layer multplex network we have N = 78, K = 620, O = 896 and O w = 999. A schematc (aggregated) representaton of ths multplex network s reported n Fg. 1. The node color-code ndcates the layers n whch nodes are nvolved, whle the sze of each node s proportonal to ts overlappng degree o. Notce that most of the nodes partcpate to all the three layers, whle just a few of them are present n only one or two layers. IV. BASIC NODE PROPERTIES One of the smplest features of a sngle-layer network s ts degree dstrbuton. For multplex networks, we can study how the degree s dstrbuted among the dfferent nodes at each layer, but t s also mportant to evaluate how the degree of a node s dstrbuted across dfferent layers. It s n fact possble that nodes whch are hubs n one layer have only few connectons, or are even solated, n another layer. Or, alternatvely, nodes whch are hubs n one layer are also hubs n the other layers. We have therefore computed the aggregated topologcal degree k and the degree of the nodes n each layer k [α], wth α {T, O, C}, rankng the nodes accordng to ther aggregated topologcal degree. In Fg. 2(a) we compare

5 5 FIG. 2. (color onlne) (a) The top row of the panel shows wth a color-code the degree k of each node, from the largest (darkest, leftmost) to the smallest (brghtest, rghtmost). Keepng fxed the rankng nduced by k, n the other three rows we report respectvely the degree n the trust layer k [T], operatonal layer k [O] and communcaton layer k [C]. (b) Same as panel (a) but n the frst row nodes are ranked accordng to ther overlappng degree o. (c) The heat map represents the Kendall τ correlaton coeffcent between k, o, k [T], k [O] and k [C]. Notce that the degree of a node n the operatonal layer O s poorly correlated wth ts degree n the communcaton and trust layers (brght yellow regons n the heat map). wth a color-code plot the values of k wth the values k [α] of the node degree at each layer α. By vsual nspecton, the four degree sequences appear weakly correlated, wth nodes whch are hubs n one level often havng only few connectons n another layer. In Fg. 2(b) we report the results obtaned by rankng the nodes accordng to ther overlappng degree o. Also n ths case we observe weak correlatons between the four degree sequences. To better quantfy such correlatons, we computed the Kendall rank correlaton coeffcent, τ k, whch measures the smlarty of two ranked sequences of data X and Y. The correlaton coeffcent τ k s a non-parametrc measure of statstcally dependence between two rankngs, snce t does not make any assumpton about the dstrbutons of X and Y, and takes values n [ 1, 1]. We get τ k (X, Y ) = 1 f the two rankngs are dentcal, τ k (X, Y ) = 1 f one rankng s exactly the reverse of the other and fnally τ k (X, Y ) = 0 f X and Y are ndependent. In Fg. 2(c) we report as a heat map the values of τ k obtaned for the rankngs of each par of varables. Notce that the aggregated degrees k and o are usually weakly correlated wth the degree of node on each sngle layer. The hghest correlaton s ndeed found between the degree of the aggregated topologcal network k and the overlappng degree o. Due to the heterogenety n the degree dstrbuton of each layer and to the weak correlaton observed between the degrees of the same node at dfferent layers, t s necessary to ntroduce a measure to quantfy the rchness of the connectvty patterns across layers. For nstance, consder two nodes and j havng exactly the same value of overlappng degree o = o j, and magne that s a massve hub on a layer α and an solated node on the other layers, so that o = k [α], whle j has the same number of edges on each layer, so that o j = Mk [α] j, α. From a multplex perspectve and j have radcally dfferent roles, but ths fact s not detectable by comparng ther overlappng degrees, whch have the same value. Conversely, even f o and o j are very dfferent, and j can look very smlar f one consders the contrbuton of each layer to the total overlappng degree of the two nodes. A sutable quantty to descrbe the dstrbuton of the degree of node among the varous layers s the entropy of the multplex degree: H = M α=1 k [α] ln o ( k [α] o ). (15) Ths entropy s equal to zero f all the lnks of node are n a sngle layer, whle t takes ts maxmum value when the lnks are unformly dstrbuted over the dfferent layers. In general, the hgher the value of H, the more unformly the lnks of node are dstrbuted across the layers. A smlar quantty s the multplex partcpaton coeffcent P of node : P = [ M M 1 1 M ( [α] ) ] 2 k. (16) α=1 The defnton of the multplex partcpaton coeffcent s n the same sprt of that of partcpaton coeffcent ntroduced n Refs. [23, 24] to quantfy the partcpaton of a node to the dfferent communtes of a network. In ths adaptaton to mult-layer networks, P takes values n [0, 1] and measures whether the lnks of node are unformly dstrbuted among the M layers, or are nstead prmarly concentrated n just one or a few layers. Namely, the coeffcent P s equal to 0 when all the edges of le n one layer, whle P = 1 only when node has exactly the same number of edges on each of the M layers. In general, the larger the value of P, the more equally dstrbuted s the partcpaton of node to the M layers of the multplex. The partcpaton coeffcent P of the whole multplex s defned as the average of P over all nodes,.e. P = 1/N P. The two quanttes P and H gve very smlar nformaton, so that n the followng we wll dscuss the results for P only. o

6 6 FIG. 3. (color onlne) (a) Rank dstrbuton of the partcpaton coeffcent P for the mult-layer network of Top Noordn Indonesan Terrorsts. M = 3 layers were consdered, namely trust, operatonal and communcaton. The average value P = 0.72 s shown as a horzontal blue lne, whle the shaded band ndcates the standard devaton. (b) A cartography of the roles of the nodes n a mult-layer network can be obtaned by plottng, for each node, the multplex partcpaton coeffcent P versus the Z-score of the total overlappng degree z(o ). Even f two nodes have exactly the same value of z(o ) (lke node 16 and node 34, ndcated by the orange and blue crcles, respectvely), they can have pretty dfferent roles, accordng to the value of the multplex partcpaton coeffcent. (c) The ego networks of node 16 and 34, n whch edges are colored accordng to the layer to whch they belong, respectvely green (trust), blue (operatonal) and red (communcaton). It s evdent that the connectvty pattern of node 16, whose lnks are homogeneously dstrbuted across the three layers, s more multplex than that of node 34, whch s nstead focused on the operatonal layer. In Fg. 3(a) we plot the dstrbuton of P for the multlayer network of Indonesan terrorsts under study. Although the average partcpaton coeffcent of the multplex s equal to P = 0.72, we observe a qute broad dstrbuton of P n the range [0, 1]. Ths varance suggests the exstence n the network of varous levels of node partcpaton to each of the three layers. Snce the overlappng degree of a node represents ts overall mportance n terms of number of ncdent edges, whle the multplex partcpaton coeffcent gves nformaton about the dstrbuton of ncdent edges across the layers, we propose to classfy the nodes of a multplex by lookng, at the same tme, at ther multplex partcpaton coeffcent and at ther overlappng degree. Wth respect to the multplex partcpaton coeffcent, we dentfy three classes. We call focused those nodes for whch 0 P 1/3, mxed the nodes havng 1/3 < P 2/3 and truly multplex (or even smply multplex) the nodes for whch P > 2/3. Instead of the overlappng degree we consder the assocated Z-score, whch allows to compare multplex networks of dfferent sze: z(o ) = o o σ o (17) where o s equal to the average overlappng degree of the nodes of the system, and σ o s the correspondng standard devaton. Wth respect to the Z-score of ther overlappng degree, we dstngush hubs, for whch z(o ) 2, from regular nodes, for whch z(o ) < 2. Consequently, by consderng the multplex partcpaton coeffcent P of a node and ts total overlappng degree o we can defne sx classes of nodes, as depcted n Fg. 3(b), where we represent each node as a pont n the (P, z(o )) plane. Notce that the dstrbuton of z(o ) s asymmetrc and unbalanced towards postve values, and ths s a sgn of the heterogenety of the total overlappng degree. Moreover, there s a qute large heterogenety n the values of P for a fxed value of z(o ). Let us focus for nstance on two specfc nodes, namely node 16 and 34. These two nodes have the same overlappng degree, namely o 16 = o 34 = 25, correspondng to z(o 16 ) = z(o 34 ) = 0.12, but very dfferent partcpaton coeffcent across layers T, O and C, respectvely P 16 = and P 34 = Consequently, even f the overall number of edges of node 16 and node 34 s the same (whch would make these two nodes ndstngushable n the aggregated overlappng network), they play radcally dfferent roles, as becomes evdent by lookng at ther ego networks, reported n Fg. 3(c). In fact, whle node 34 s hghly focused on the operatonal layer (blue edges), wth only one edge n the trust layer (green edge) and one edge n the communcaton layer (red edge), node 16 s nstead nvolved n all the three layers, wth a comparable number of edges n each of them. Ths mples that the removal of node 34 would prmarly affect just the operatonal layer, whle the absence of node 16 could cause major dsruptons n the trust, operatonal and communcaton networks. Smlar results are obtaned by consderng the Z-score of the degree k of node n the aggregated topologcal network (fgure not shown).

7 7 FIG. 4. (color onlne) (a) For each layer α, we show n the color map the fracton of edges whch s also present n each other layer α. (b) Probablty P w of fndng a certan lnk at layer O (sold blue lne), C (dotted green lne)and B (dashed red lne), condtonal to the weght w [T] j of the same lnk at layer T. (c) The values of P w computed on real data for layer O (sold blue lne) are compared to those obtaned by randomzng the edges keepng fxed the total number of lnks K [O] (dashed grey lne) or the degree dstrbuton P (k [O] ) (dotted magenta lne) for the operatonal layer. V. EDGE OVERLAP AND SOCIAL REINFORCEMENT After havng proposed some measures of the role of ndvdual nodes n the multplex, we now am at quantfyng the mportance of each layer as a whole. For nstance, we can detect the exstence of correlatons across the layers of a multplex by computng the edge overlap o j of Eq. (7) for each edge j, and by lookng at how ths quantty s dstrbuted. We now consder the multplex formed by all the four layers of the Noordn Indonesan Terrorst Network,.e. the trust, operatonal, communcaton and busness layers, so that 1 o j 4 for all possble pars of nodes connected by at least one edge. If we look at the dstrbuton of o j, we see that 46% of the edges exst n just one of the four layers, 27% are present n two layers, 23% exst n three layers and only 4% are present n all the four layers. Besdes the dstrbuton of o j gves some nformaton about the exstence of nter-layer correlatons, t s not able to dsentangle the relevance of sngle layers. A slghtly more sophstcated quantty we can look at s the condtonal probablty of fndng a lnk at layer α gven the presence of an edge between the same nodes at layer α: ] P (a [α ] j a [α] j ) = j a[α j a [α] j (18) j a[α] j The denomnator of Eq. (18) s equal to the number K [α] of edges at layer α, whle the numerator s equal to the number of such edges whch are also present at the layer α. The condtonal probablty P (a [α ] j a [α] j ) s shown as a heat-map n Fg. 4(a) for the four layers. For nstance, the frst column shows wth a color-code the probablty to fnd a lnk on layer T gven ts exstence on layer B, C, O or T (obvously, we have P (a [T ] ) = 1), whle j a[t ] j the last row represents the fracton of edges n layer T whch also exst n layer T, O, C and B. Snce layers T and O have a composte nternal structure of four levels each, whch allows us to assgn a weght w [T] j and w [O] j to each par of connected nodes and j, t s nterestng to study the probablty P w (a [α ] j w [α] j ) of havng a lnk on layer α gven ts weght on the leadng layer α, wth α correspondng to layers O, and T. In Fg. 4(b) we plot the probablty of fndng a lnk at layer O, C and B, gven the weght w [T] j of the lnk at layer T. Even though n prncple w [T] j = 4 s possble, none of the edges appears together n all classmates, frendshp, knshp and soul-mates sub-layers of the trust layer. In all the three cases, P w s an ncreasng functon of w [T] j. Fg. 4(b) suggests that the stronger the trust connecton between two terrorsts the hgher the probablty for them to operate together, communcate or havng common busness. In partcular, for layer O and C, whch are the ones that have a number of nodes comparable to the one of layer T, already a value of w [T] j = 2 mples that the two people have common operatons and communcatons n 80% of the cases. If w [T] j = 3, then the probablty that the edge j exsts n all the three remanng layer s equal to 1. Ths phenomenon can be explaned n terms of socal renforcement, meanng that the exstence of strong connectons n the Trust layer, whch represents the strongest relatonshps between two people, actually fosters the creaton of lnks n other layers and produces a measurable effect on the probablty to operate, communcate and do busness together. Despte we do not have longtudnal nformaton to test the hypothess that orgnal trust connectons actually caused the creaton of lnks n other layers by means of socal renforcement, n ths partcular case we have to stress that the strength of the trust relatonshp between two ndvduals s hgher f they had been kn, classmates, soul-mates, and/or frends, respec-

8 8 FIG. 5. (color onlne) (a) The node clusterng coeffcent C of the aggregated topologcal network and of the three layers T, O, C, respectvely denoted as C [T], C [O] and C [C]. The nodes are ranked accordng to ther value of C on the aggregated topologcal network. (b) The heat map represents the correlaton between the rankngs of nodes accordng to ther clusterng coeffcents on the three layers and on the topologcal aggregated network. Notce that C [α] s weakly correlated wth C for α {T, O, C}, and that such correlaton mght also be negatve, as n the case of C [O]. (c) Comparson among the clusterng coeffcent C of the aggregated topologcal network, and the mult-layer clusterng coeffcents C 1, and C 2,. The nodes are ranked accordng to ther value of C. (d) The heat map represents the correlaton between the rankngs of nodes accordng to C, C 1, and C 2,. tvely [22]. Ths means that, wth hgh probablty, the establshment of any of the four Trust relatonshps between and j preceded by several years the establshment of any communcaton, operatonal or busness relatonshp regstered durng the collecton of the data set. Consequently, t s not too pretentous to suggest that a socal renforcement mechansm took place n ths small socal system, and that trust relatonshps have actually caused the subsequent communcaton and the collaboraton among the terrorsts. In order to statstcally valdate these results, n Fg. 4(c) we report the expected values of P w obtaned by randomzng the non-leadng layers whle keepng fxed ether the total number of lnks k [α] or the degree dstrbuton P (k [α] ). In the frst case, each non-leadng layer s an Erdös-Reny random graph and P w s not even correlated wth the weghts on layer T, as expected. In the second case, whch s an extenson to multplexes of the confguraton model, for each weght w [T] j the condtonal probablty to fnd an edge on the operatonal layer s systematcally lower n the randomzed networks than n the orgnal one. Hence, we can conclude that nter-layer correlatons among the heterogeneous degree dstrbutons of the varous levels do not provde an ultmate explanatons to the founded results for P w and that the Trust layer s genunely drvng the observed connecton pattern. Results analogous to that of layer O, were also found for layers C and B.

9 Smlar results are obtaned consderng the operatonal network (nstead of the trust network) as leadng layer, but n ths case the condtonal probablty of fndng an edge n T, C and B gven ts weght n O was substantally smaller than those reported n Fg. 4(b) and Fg. 4)(c)(fgure not shown). Ths s not surprsng at all, snce whle t s clear that a stronger level of trust between two ndvduals can boost ther communcatons and ther common operatons, we expect a weaker causalty between the strength of dfferent operatons two ndvduals have shared and ther trust and communcatons. The exstence of a weaker nteracton between the operatonal layer and the other three layers ncreases the valdty of our hypothess that the trust layer s ndeed controllng the overall structure of the multplex network through a socal renforcement mechansm and that the relatve mportance of the trust layer for the formaton of edges on other layers s not a mere consequence of exstence of sub-layers. 9 VI. TRANSITIVITY AND CLUSTERING One of the most remarkable characterstc of complex real-world sngle-layer networks, especally acquantance and collaboraton networks, s the tendency of nodes to form trangles,.e. smple cycles nvolvng three nodes. Ths wdely observed tendency s concsely expressed by the popular sayng the frend of your frend s my frend and s usually quantfed through the so-called node clusterng coeffcent [25]. The clusterng coeffcent of node s defned as : j,m C = a ja jm a m j,m j,m a = a ja jm a m. ja m k (k 1) (19) and quantfes how lkely t s that two neghbors of node are connected to each other. In fact, Eq. (19) measures the fracton of trads centered n that close nto trangles. By defnton C takes values n the nterval [0, 1]. Averagng ths quantty over all the nodes n a network, one gets the network clusterng coeffcent: C = 1 C. (20) N FIG. 6. (color onlne) Scatter-plots of (a) C 1, versus C 2, (b) C 1, versus o and (c) C 2, versus o. The values of the Kendall s τ and of the Pearson s lnear correlaton coeffcent r for any par of measures are, respectvely: τ(c,1, C,2) = 0.61, r(c,1, C,2) = 0.76, τ(c,1, o ) = 0.11, r(c,1, o ) = 0.13, τ(c,2, o ) = 0.01, r(c,2, o ) = It s worth notcng that both C,1 and C 2, are almost uncorrelated wth the overlappng degree o, a fact that confrms ther truly multplex nature. A smlar although not dentcal measure of local coheson [26], whch s commonly used n the socal scences, s the network transtvty [27]: T = 3 No. of trangles n the graph. (21) No. of trads n the graph Ths s defned as the proporton of trads,.e. connected trples of nodes, whch close nto trangles. Snce each layer of a multplex can be seen as a snglelayer network, the defntons of network clusterng coeffcent and network transtvty can be used to characterze the abundance of trangles on each layer. In general, dfferent layers may show smlar or dssmlar patterns of clusterng. In Table II we report the average clusterng

10 10 Layer C T T O C A TABLE II. The average clusterng coeffcent C and the transtvty T for layers T, O, C and for the aggregated topologcal network A. coeffcent and the transtvty for each layer of the terrorst network, and for ts topologcal aggregate. Notce that each layer has qute pecular values of clusterng and transtvty, whch are n turn dfferent from those measured on the aggregated topologcal network. In partcular, the hghest values of clusterng and transtvty are observed n the Operatons layer, probably due to the fact that terrorst mssons usually nvolve more than two people at the same tme. In Fg. 5(a) we focus on the node clusterng coeffcent, we rank the nodes of the multplex accordng to the value of C for the aggregated topologcal network and we compare ths value wth the clusterng coeffcent calculated on each layer C [α]. As shown, many nodes dsplay qute dfferent values of the clusterng coeffcent across the layers. We have computed the Kendall correlaton coeffcent τ k between each par of layers and between each layer and the topologcal aggregate. The results are shown n Fg. 5(b), as a heat map. Notce that at the best the sequences of clusterng coeffcent are weakly correlated, when not uncorrelated or even ant-correlated. In partcular, the rankng of clusterng coeffcent for the Operatons layer s ant-correlated wth that of the other three layers and of the topologcal aggregated network. However, comparng the sequences of C for each layer tells us very lttle about the nterplay between the several levels of the system n terms of clusterng. In partcular, t s nterestng to study to whch extent the multplexcty affects the formaton of trangles,.e. how the presence of dfferent layers can gve rse to trangles whch were mpossble to close at the level of sngle layers. For ths reason we need to extend the noton of trangle to take nto account the rchness added by the presence of more than one layer. We defne a 2-trangle a trangle whch s formed by an edge belongng to one layer and two edges belongng to a second layer. Smlarly, we call a 3-trangle a trangle whch s composed by three edges all lyng n dfferent layers. In order to quantfy the added value provded by the multplex structure n terms of clusterng, we defne two parameters of clusterng nterdependence I 1 and I 2. I 1 s the rato between the number of trangles n the multplex whch can be obtaned only as 2-trangles, and the number of trangles n the aggregated system. I 2 s the rato between the number of trangles n the multplex whch can be obtaned only as 3-trangles and the number of trangles n the aggregated system. Then, I = I 1 +I 2 s the total fracton of trangles of the aggregated topologcal network whch can not be found entrely n one of the layers. For the mult-layer network of terrorsts we obtan I 1 = 0.31 and I 2 of the order of 10 3, whch ndcates that almost no trangle s formed exclusvely by the nterplay of three dfferent layers. Ths result s suggest the presence of non-trval patterns n clusterng and tradc closure n mult-layer systems. In ths work we also am at generalzng the noton of clusterng coeffcent to mult-layer networks. Recallng the defnton of 2-trangle and 3-trangle, we defne a 1- trad centered at node, for nstance j k, a trad n whch both edge j and edge k are on the same layer. We also defne a 2-trad as a trad whose two lnks belong to two dfferent layers of the systems. We are now ready to gve two defntons of clusterng coeffcent for multplex networks. Smlar defntons have been recently and ndependently proposed n Ref. [28]. The frst coeffcent C,1 s defned, for each node, as the rato between the number of 2-trangles wth a vertex n and the number of 1-trads centered n. We can express ths clusterng coeffcent n terms of the mult-layer adjacency matrx as: C,1 = α α α j,m (a[α] ] j a[α jm a[α] m ) (M 1) α j,m (a[α] j a[α] m ) = α α α j,m (a[α] ] j a[α jm a[α] m ) = (M 1) α k[α] (k [α] 1) (22) Snce each 1-trad can theoretcally be closed as a 2- trangle on each of the M layers of the multplex excludng the layer to whch ts edges belong, n order to have a normalsed coeffcent we have to dvde the term by M 1. In addton to ths, we defne a second clusterng coeffcent for multplex networks as the rato between the number of 3-trangles wth node as a vertex, and the number of 2-trads centered n. In terms of adjacency matrces, we have: C,2 = α α α α α,α j,m (a[α] (M 2) α α α ] ] j a[α jm a[α m ) j,m (a[α] ] j a[α m ). (23) where a normalsaton coeffcent M 2 has been added. Whle C,1 s a sutable defnton for multplexes wth M 2, C,2 can only be defned for systems composed of at least three layers. Averagng over all the nodes of the system, we obtan the network clusterng coeffcents C 1 and C 2. In Fg. 5(c) we rank the nodes of the terrorst network accordng to ther value of C for the aggregated system, and compare ths sequence of values wth the ones obtaned wth the two measures of multplex clusterng, C,1 and C,2. As shown n the fgure, C,1 and C,2 capture dfferent effects of mult-layer clusterng. Ths fact s confrmed by the heat map reported n Fg. 5(d), whch shows wth a color-code the non-parametrc correlatons among C,1, C,2 and C. Notce that, n general, the

11 11 correlaton between C and both C,1 and C,2 s pretty small. These results ndcate that multplex clusterng provdes nformaton whch are substantally dfferent from those obtaned by lookng at the clusterng of the aggregated network. In addton to ths, C,1 and C,2 are poorly correlated, as s also evdent from Fg. 6(a). In practce, for a gven value of C,1, we have nodes wth a wde range of values of C,2, and vce versa. Consequently, t s necessary to use both clusterng coeffcents n order to properly quantfy the abundance of trangles n mult-layer networks. In Fg. 6(b) and Fg. 6(c) we report the scatter-plots of C,1 and C,2 versus o. Multplex clusterng coeffcents are genune multplex varable and appear to be not correlated wth the degree of the nodes of the system. We also found that the clusterng coeffcent s not correlated wth other measures of aggregated degree, such as k and o w (fgures not shown). We can also generalze the defnton of transtvty T to the case of mult-layer networks. Smlarly to the case of the clusterng coeffcent we propose two measures of transtvty. We defne T 1 as the rato between the number of 2-trangles and M 1 tmes the number of 1-trads n the mult-layer network. Moreover, we ntroduce T 2 as the rato between the number of 3-trangles and M 2 tmes the number of 2-trads n the system. Notce that clusterng nterdependences I 1 and I 2, average multplex clusterng coeffcents C 1 and C 2 and multplex transtvtes T 1 and T 2 are all global graph varables whch gve a dfferent perspectve on the multlayer patterns of clusterng and tradc closure wth respect to the clusterng coeffcent and the transtvty computed for each layer of the network. We have computed all such quanttes for the mult-layer network of the Indonesan terrorsts and, as a term of comparson, we have constructed a confguraton model for multplex networks, whch wll be useful to prove the non-trval organzaton of the network under study. In analogy wth the case of a sngle-layer network, for a multplex wth M layers, where each node s characterzed by a degree vector k, we call confguraton model the set of multplexes obtaned from the orgnal system by randomzng edges and keepng fxed the sequence of degree vectors {k 1, k 2,..., k N },.e. keepng fxed the degree sequence at each layer α. We can now compare the values of C and T, C 1 and C 2, T 1 and T 2, I 1 and I 2 obtaned on real data wth the average values found for the mult-layer confguraton model. The comparson s shown n Table III. As expected C and T computed on the aggregated topologcal network for real data are systematcally hgher than the ones obtaned on randomzed data, where edge correlatons are washed out by the randomzaton. For the same reason, C 1, C 2, T 1 and T 2 are hgher on real data. Conversely, we obtaned hgher values on randomzed data for I 1 and I 2. Ths s not surprsng, snce the measures of clusterng nterdependence tell us about the fracton of trangles whch can be exclusvely found as mult-trangle n the system. Snce the confguraton model washes out nter-layer correlatons, t s generally easer to fnd mult-trangles on a randomzed multplex network rather than on a real one where edges have a hgher overlap. All these results demon- Varable Real data Randomzed data C T C C T T I I TABLE III. Values of clusterng C and transtvty T computed on the aggregated topologcal network, and values of the ntroduced measures for clusterng n mult-layer networks, namely the multplex clusterng C 1 and C 2, the multplex transtvty T 1 and T 2, and the clusterng nterdependence I 1 and I 2. For comparson we report also the results for a randomzed system obtaned through a mult-layer confguraton model. strate that, as prevously shown for the overlap, also the clusterng coeffcent appears to be affected by the presence of non-trval structural propertes across the dfferent layers of the multplex network under study. VII. REACHABILITY, SHORTEST PATHS AND INTERDEPENDENCE Reachablty s an mportant feature n networked systems. In sngle-layer networks t has to do wth the exstence and length of shortest paths connectng pars of nodes. In mult-level systems, shortest paths may sgnfcantly dffer between dfferent layers, and each layer and the aggregated topologcal networks as well. To capture the multplex contrbuton to the reachablty of each unt of the network, the so-called node nterdependence has been recently ntroduced n Refs. [12, 29]. The nterdependence λ of node s defned as: λ = j ψ j σ j (24) where σ j s the total number of shortest paths between node and node j on the multplex network, and ψ j s the number of shortest paths between node and node j whch make use of lnks n two or more than two layers. Hence, the node nterdependence s equal to 1 when all shortest paths make use of edges layng at least on two layers, and equal to 0 when each of the shortest paths makes use of only one of the M layers of the system. Averagng λ over all nodes, we obtan the network nterdependence λ = (1/N) λ. In Fg. 7 we dsplay the rank dstrbuton of λ. The network has a large varety of node nterdependences: although most of the nodes

12 12 and, as shown n Fg. 7(b) provdes nformaton n terms of reachablty whch s slghtly ant-correlated to measures of degree such as o. In fact, a node wth a hgh overlappng degree qute lkely wll have a number of dfferent possbltes to choose the frst edge to go towards the other nodes, and n ths way t wll have a low value of λ. Conversely, a node wth low degree wll more lkely have a hgh value of λ, beng ts shortest paths constraned to a lmted selecton of edges and layers from the frst step. Moreover, λ appears to be slghtly ant-correlated wth P, as confrmed by the values of Kendall s and Pearson s correlaton coeffcents (see the capton of Fg. 7). VIII. CENTRALITY The concept of node centralty s an mportant and well-studed ssue n network theory. Varous measures of centralty, such as the node degree, the closeness and the betweenness, have been proposed and used over the years to quantfy the mportance of a node n a snglelayer network [27]. The extenson of these concepts to multplex networks s stll an open research queston. In Secton II we have proposed varous ways to extend the defnton of node degree to the case of a mult-layer system. Here, we wll focus our attenton on the egenvector centralty, whch s a generalzaton of the concept of degree centralty. In a sngle-layer network the egenvector centralty of a node s defned as the -th component of the egenvector assocated to the leadng egenvalue of the adjacency matrx of the network [30]. For a multplex network, we can calculate the egenvector centralty at each layer. If we denote as E [α], the egenvector centralty of node at layer α, then the egenvector centralty of node n the multplex network s a vector: E = {E [1],..., E [M] }. (25) FIG. 7. (color onlne) (a) Rank dstrbuton of the node nterdependence λ n the Indonesan Terrorst multplex network. (b) Scatter-plot of the nterdependence λ versus o and (c) versus P. The correspondng value of Kendall s τ and Pearson s r correlaton coeffcent are, respectvely, τ(λ, o ) = 0.41, r(λ, o ) = 0.56, τ(λ, P ) = 0.41, r(λ, P ) = 0.57 have a value of λ n the range [0.27, 0.56] around the average value λ = 0.41, there are also nodes wth values as small as λ = 0.1, and two nodes wth values larger than 0.8. The nterdependence s a genune multplex measure We can also compute the egenvector centralty on the aggregated topologcal and on the aggregated overlappng network. We ndcate the results respectvely as E (A) and E (O). In Fg. 8(a), 8(b) and 8(c) we compare the egenvector centralty computed on each layer wth that evaluated on the aggregated topologcal and overlappng networks. We notce only very weak correlatons between the dfferent centralty sequences. Such results are very smlar to those obtaned n Secton IV for the case of node degree, as a consequence of the fact that, at order zero, the egenvector centralty reduces to the node degree. The Kendall correlaton coeffcents obtaned for pars of centraltes are reported n Fg. 8(d) as a heat map. For a large fracton of nodes, the rankngs nduced by the egenvector centralty at dfferent layers dffer sgnfcantly. A slghtly hgher value of correlaton s found between centralty at dfferent layers and the centralty of the aggregated network, whle the maxmum correlaton s observed between the values of egenvector centralty

13 13 FIG. 8. (color onlne) (a) Egenvector centralty of the aggregated topologcal network E (A), and of the trust E [T], operatonal and communcaton layer E [C]. The nodes are ranked accordng to ther value of E (A) on the aggregated topologcal E [O] network. (b) Smlar to panel (a) but here nodes are ranked accordng to ther egenvector centralty computed on the aggregated overlappng network E (O). (c) Comparson of the rankngs of egenvector centralty computed on the aggregated topologcal network and on the aggregated overlappng network, respectvely E (A) and E (O). (d) The heat map shows the non-parametrc correlaton between the rankngs nduces by the dfferent centraltes. computed on the aggregated topologcal network and on the aggregated overlappng network. It s nterestng to notce, as shown n Fg. 9, that the centralty computed on the aggregated networks (e.g., on the overlappng network) s not correlated wth the multplex partcpaton coeffcent of the nodes. In fact, f we fx the value of E (O), we observe a large heterogenety n the values of P, and vce-versa. Untl now we have computed and compared the egenvector centraltes at each layer of the network. As already done for other metrcs, we wll now propose a proper multplex defnton of the egenvector centralty whch takes nto account the presence of all layers at the same tme. We follow a smlar but relatvely smpler approach than the one recently proposed n [31]. Gven a two-layer multplex network (a duplex) and the correspondng adjacency matrces A [1] and A [2], we can construct the followng adjacency matrx: M(b) = ba [1] + (1 b)a [2], (26) whch s a convex combnaton of A [1] and A [2] where b s a parameter takng values n the nterval [0, 1]. We call such matrx the mult-adjacency matrx. Notce that the parameter b sets the relatve contrbuton of each layer to the multplex structure. In fact, f b = 0 (respectvely, b = 1) the mult-adjacency matrx of the duplex reduces to A [2] (respectvely A [1] ). We can consder b = 0.5 as the benchmark case, where the two layers are gven the same weght. Notably, we have M(b = 0.5) = O/2,.e. for b = 0.5 the mult-adjacency matrx s proportonal to the aggregated overlappng network. For each value of b, M s a square matrx wth nonnegatve entres. Thus, beng satsfed all the hypotheses of the Perron-Frobenus theorem, we can calculate the egenvector centralty of M as a functon of b. In order to assess the role of each layer n determnng the multplex centralty, we follow ths approach: we compute the egenvector centralty of the benchmark case b = 0.5 (correspondng to matrx O); we then compute the egenvector centralty of M for a generc value of b, and we evaluate the Kendall correlaton coeffcent τ k between the centralty rankng obtaned for b = b and the benchmark case b = 0.5. Snce the multplex network of the Indonesan terrorsts has three layers, we can construct