TL;DR
This paper demonstrates that microscopic network models and macroscopic branching processes can differ significantly due to coalescence, and proposes a non-linear estimator to accurately infer model parameters across system sizes.
Contribution
It analytically shows how coalescence causes discrepancies between microscopic and macroscopic spreading descriptions and introduces a non-linear estimator to correct parameter inference.
Findings
Coalescence causes non-linear effects in spreading dynamics.
A universal non-linear scaling function describes coalescence impact.
The proposed estimator accurately infers microscopic parameters from macroscopic data.
Abstract
Spreading processes are conventionally monitored on a macroscopic level by counting the number of incidences over time. The spreading process can then be modeled either on the microscopic level, assuming an underlying interaction network, or directly on the macroscopic level, assuming that microscopic contributions are negligible. The macroscopic characteristics of both descriptions are commonly assumed to be identical. In this work, we show that these characteristics of microscopic and macroscopic descriptions can be different due to coalescence, i.e., a node being activated at the same time by multiple sources. In particular, we consider a (microscopic) branching network (probabilistic cellular automaton) with annealed connectivity disorder, record the macroscopic activity, and then approximate this activity by a (macroscopic) branching process. In this framework, we analytically…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
