with the recent appearance of the internet and the world - wide web , understanding the properties of growing networks with popularity - based construction rules has become an active and fruitful research area @xcite . in such models ,
newly - introduced nodes preferentially attach to pre - existing nodes of the network that are already `` popular '' .
this leads to graphs whose structure is quite different from the well - known _ random graph _
@xcite in which links are created at random between nodes without regard to their popularity .
this discovery of a new class of graph theory problems has fueled much effort to characterize their properties .
one basic measure of the structure of such networks is the _ node degree _
@xmath5 defined as the number of nodes in the network that are linked to @xmath0 other nodes . in the case of the random graph , the node degree is simply a poisson distribution .
in contrast , many popularity - driven growing networks have much broader degree distributions with a stretched exponential or a power - law tail .
the latter form means that there is no characteristic scale for the node degree , a feature that typifies many networked systems @xcite .
power laws , or more generally , distributions with highly skewed tails , characterize the degree distributions of many man - made and naturally occurring networks @xcite .
for example , the degree distributions at the level of autonomous systems and at the router level exhibit highly skewed tails @xcite .
other important internet - based graphs , such as the hyperlink graph of the world - wide web also appear to have a degree distribution with a power - law tail @xcite .
these observations have spurred a flurry of recent work to understand the underlying mechanisms for these phenomena .
a related example with interest to anyone who publishes , is the distribution of scientific citations @xcite .
here one treats publications as nodes and citations as links in a citation graph .
currently - available data suggests that the citation distribution has a power - law tail with an associated exponent close to @xmath6 @xcite . as we shall see ,
this exponent emerges naturally in the _ growing network _ ( gn ) model where the relative probability of linking from a new node to a previous node ( equivalent to citing an earlier paper ) is strictly proportional to the popularity of the target node .    in this paper
, we apply tools from statistical physics , especially the rate equation approach , to quantify the structure of growing networks and to elucidate the types of geometrical features that arise in networks with physically - motivated growth rules .
the utility of the rate equations has been demonstrated in a diverse range of phenomena in non - equilibrium statistical physics , such as aggregation @xcite , coarsening @xcite , and epitaxial surface growth @xcite .
we will attempt to convince the reader that the rate equations are also a simple yet powerful analysis tool to analyze growing network systems .
in addition to providing comprehensive information about the node degree distribution , the rate equations can be easily adapted to analyze both heterogeneous and directed networks , the age distribution of nodes , correlations between node degrees , various global network properties , as well as the cluster size distribution in models that give rise to independently evolving sub - networks .
thus the rate equation method appears to be better suited for probing the structure of growing networks compared to the classical approaches for analyzing random graphs , such as probabilistic @xcite or generating function @xcite techniques .    in the next section ,
we introduce three basic models that will be the focus of this review . in the following three sections , we then present rate equation analyses to determine basic geometrical properties of these networks .
we close with a brief summary .
the models we study appear to embody many of the basic growth processes in web graphs and related systems .
these include :    * the _ growing network _ ( gn ) @xcite .
nodes are added one at a time and a single link is established between the new node and a pre - existing node according to an attachment probability @xmath7 that depends only on the degree of the `` target '' node ( fig .  [ network ] ) .
+    +  [ network ] * the _ web graph _ ( wg ) .
this represents an extension of the gn to incorporate link directionality @xcite and leads to independent , dynamically generated in - degree and out - degree distributions .
the network growth occurs by two distinct processes @xcite that are meant to mimic how hyperlinks are created in the web ( fig .
[ io - growth ] ) : * * with probability @xmath8 , a new node is introduced and it immediately attaches to an earlier target node .
the attachment probability depends only on the in - degree of the target . * * with probability @xmath9 , a new link is created between already existing nodes .
the choices of the originating and target nodes depend on the out - degree of the former and the in - degree of the latter .
+    * the _ multicomponent graph _ ( mg ) .
nodes and links are introduced _ independently _ @xcite .
( i ) with probability @xmath8 , a new _ unlinked _ node is introduced , while ( ii ) with probability @xmath9 , a new link is created between existing nodes . as in the wg
, the choices of the originating and target nodes depend on the out - degree of the former and the in - degree of the latter .
step ( i ) allows for the formation of many clusters .
because of its simplicity , we first study the structure of the gn @xcite . the basic approaches developed in this section
will then be extended to the wg and mg models .
we first focus on the node degree distribution @xmath5 . to determine its evolution , we shall write the rate equations that account for the change in the degree distribution after each node addition event .
these equations contain complete information about the node degree , from which any measure of node degree ( such as moments ) can be easily extracted . for the gn growth process in
which nodes are introduced one at a time , the rate equations for the degree distribution @xmath10 are @xcite @xmath11 the first term on the right , @xmath12 , accounts for processes in which a node with @xmath13 links is connected to the new node , thus increasing @xmath5 by one . since there are @xmath14 nodes of degree @xmath13 , the rate at which such processes occur is proportional to @xmath15 , and the factor @xmath16 converts this rate into a normalized probability .
a corresponding role is played by the second ( loss ) term on the right - hand side ; @xmath17 is the probability that a node with @xmath0 links is connected to the new node , thus leading to a loss in @xmath5 .
the last term accounts for the introduction of new nodes with no incoming links .
we start by solving for the time dependence of the moments of the degree distribution defined via @xmath18 .
this is a standard method of analysis of rate equations by which one can gain partial , but valuable , information about the time dependence of the system with minimal effort . by explicitly summing eqs .
( [ nk ] ) over all @xmath0 , we easily obtain @xmath19 , whose solution is @xmath20 .
notice that by definition @xmath21 is just the total number of nodes in the network .
it is clear by the nature of the growth process that this quantity simply grows as @xmath22 . in a similar fashion ,
the first moment of the degree distribution obeys @xmath23 with solution @xmath24 .
this time evolution for @xmath25 can be understood either by explicitly summing the rate equations , or by observing that this first moment simply equals the total number of link endpoints .
clearly , this quantity must grow as @xmath26 since the introduction of a single node introduces two link endpoints .
thus we find the simple result that the first two moments are _ independent _ of the attachment kernel @xmath7 and grow _ linearly _ with time . on the other hand , higher moments and the degree distribution itself
do depend in an essential way on the kernel @xmath7 .    as a preview to the general behavior for the degree distribution ,
consider the strictly linear kernel @xcite , for which @xmath27 coincides with @xmath28 . in this case , we can solve eqs .
( [ nk ] ) for an arbitrary initial condition . however , since the long - time behavior is most interesting , we limit ourselves to the asymptotic regime ( @xmath29 ) where the initial condition is irrelevant . using therefore @xmath30 ,
we solve the first few of eqs .
( [ nk ] ) directly and obtain @xmath31 , @xmath32 , _
etc_. thus each of the @xmath5 grow linearly with time .
accordingly , we substitute @xmath33 in eqs .
( [ nk ] ) to yield the simple recursion relation @xmath34 . solving for @xmath35
gives @xmath36    returning to the case of general attachment kernels , let us assume that the degree distribution and @xmath27 both grow linearly with time .
this hypothesis can be easily verified numerically for attachment kernels that do not grow faster than linearly with @xmath0 . then substituting @xmath33 and @xmath37 into eqs .
( [ nk ] ) we obtain the recursion relation @xmath38 and @xmath39 .
finally , solving for @xmath35 , we obtain the formal expression @xmath40 to complete the solution , we need the amplitude @xmath41 . using the definition @xmath42 in eq .
( [ nkgen ] ) , we obtain the implicit relation @xmath43 which shows that the amplitude @xmath41 depends on the entire attachment kernel .    for the generic case @xmath44
, we substitute this form into eq .
( [ nkgen ] ) and then rewrite the product as the exponential of a sum of a logarithm . in the continuum limit , we convert this sum to an integral , expand the logarithm to lowest order , and then evaluate the integral to yield the following basic results : @xmath45 , & $ 0\leq\gamma<1$;\cr k^{-\nu } , \quad \nu>2 , & $ \gamma=1$;\cr { \rm best\ seller } & $ 1<\gamma<2$;\cr { \rm bible } & $ 2<\gamma$.}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    thus the degree distribution decays exponentially for @xmath46 , as in the case of the random graph , while for all @xmath47 , the distribution exhibits robust stretched exponential behavior .
the linear kernel is the case that has garnered much of the current research interest . as shown above , @xmath48}$ ] for the strictly linear kernel @xmath49 .
one might anticipate that @xmath50 holds for all _ asymptotically _ linear kernels , @xmath51 .
however , the situation is more delicate and the degree distribution exponent depends on microscopic details of @xmath7 . from eq .
( [ nkgen ] ) , we obtain @xmath52 , where the exponent @xmath53 can be tuned to _ any _ value larger than 2 @xcite .
this non - universal behavior shows that one must be cautious in drawing general conclusions from the gn with a linear attachment kernel .    ,
out - degree @xmath54 , and total degree 9.,scaledwidth=25.0% ]    [ degrees ]    as an illustrative example of the vagaries of asymptotically linear kernels , consider the shifted linear kernel @xmath55 .
one way to motivate this kernel is to explicitly keep track of link directionality . in particular
, the node degree for an undirected graph naturally generalizes to the in - degree and out - degree for a directed graph , the number of incoming and outgoing links at a node , respectively .
thus the total degree @xmath0 in a directed graph is the sum of the in - degree @xmath56 and out - degree @xmath57 ( fig .  [ degrees ] ) .
( more details on this model are given in the next section . )
the most general linear attachment kernel for a directed graph has the form @xmath58 .
the gn corresponds to the case where the out - degree of any node equals one ; thus @xmath59 and @xmath60 .
for this example the general linear attachment kernel reduces to @xmath61 . since the overall scale is irrelevant , we can re - write @xmath7 as the shifted linear kernel @xmath55 , with @xmath62 that can vary over the range @xmath63 .    to determine the degree distribution for the shifted linear kernel , note that @xmath64 simply equals . using @xmath65 , @xmath66 and @xmath30 , we get @xmath67 and hence the relation @xmath53 from the previous paragraph becomes @xmath68 .
thus a simple additive shift in the attachment kernel profoundly affects the asymptotic degree distribution .
furthermore , from eq .
( [ nkgen ] ) we determine the entire degree distribution to be @xmath69    finally , we outline the intriguing behavior for super - linear kernels . in this case
, there is a `` runaway '' or gelation - like phenomenon in which one node links to almost every other node . for @xmath70 ,
all but a finite number of nodes are linked to a _
node that has the rest of the links .
we term such an overwhelmingly popular node as a `` bible '' . for @xmath71 ,
the number of nodes with a just a few links is no longer finite , but grows slower than linearly in time , and the remainder of the nodes are linked to an extremely popular node that we now term `` best seller '' .
full details about this runaway behavior are given in @xcite .
as a final parenthetical note , when the attachment kernel has the form @xmath72 , with @xmath73 , there is preferential attachment to poorly - connected sites . here
, the degree distribution exhibits faster than exponential decay , @xmath74 . when @xmath75 , the propensity for avoiding popularity is so strong that there is a finite probability of forming a `` worm '' graph in which each node attaches only to its immediate predecessor .
a practically - relevant generalization of the gn is to endow each node with an intrinsic and permanently defined `` attractiveness '' @xcite .
this accounts for the obvious fact that not all nodes are equivalent , but that some are clearly more attractive than others at their inception .
thus the subsequent attachment rate to a node should be a function of both its degree and its intrinsic attractiveness .
for this generalization , the rate equation approach yields complete results with minimal additional effort beyond that needed to solve the homogeneous network .
let us assign each node an attractiveness parameter @xmath76 , with arbitrary distribution , at its inception .
this attractiveness modifies the node attachment rate as follows : for a node with degree @xmath0 and attractiveness @xmath77 , the attachment rate is simply @xmath78 .
now we need to characterize nodes both by their degree and their attractiveness  thus @xmath79 is the number of nodes with degree @xmath0 and attractiveness @xmath77 .
this joint degree - attractiveness distribution obeys the rate equation , @xmath80 here @xmath81 is the probability that a newly - introduced node has attractiveness @xmath77 , and the normalization factor @xmath82 .
following the same approach as that used to analyze eq .
( [ nk ] ) , we substitute @xmath65 and @xmath83 into eq .
( [ nk - het ] ) to obtain the recursion relation @xmath84    for concreteness , consider the linear attachment kernel @xmath85 .
then applying the same analysis as in the homogeneous network , we find @xmath86 to determine the amplitude @xmath41 we substitute ( [ nk - het ] ) into the definition @xmath87 and use the identity @xcite @xmath88 to simplify the sum .
this yields the implicit relation @xmath89 this condition on @xmath41 leads to two alternatives : if the support of @xmath77 is unbounded , then the integral diverges and there is no solution for @xmath41 .
in this limit , the most attractive node is connected to a finite fraction of all links .
conversely , if the support of @xmath77 is bounded , the resulting degree distribution is similar to that of the homogeneous network . for fixed @xmath77 , @xmath90 with an attractiveness - dependent decay exponent @xmath91
amusingly , the total degree distribution @xmath92 is no longer a strict power law @xcite .
rather , the asymptotic behavior is governed by properties of the initial attractiveness distribution near the upper cutoff .
in particular , if @xmath93 ( with @xmath94 to ensure normalization ) , the total degree distribution exhibits a logarithmic correction @xmath95      in addition to the degree distribution , we determine _ when _ connections occur .
naively , we expect that older nodes will be better connected .
we study this feature by resolving each node both by its degree and its age to provide a more complete understanding of the network evolution . thus define @xmath96 to be the average number of nodes of age @xmath97 that have @xmath13 incoming links at time @xmath22 . here
age @xmath97 means that the node was introduced at time @xmath98 .
the original degree distribution may be recovered from the joint age - degree distribution through @xmath99 .    for simplicity , we consider only the case of the strictly linear kernel ; more general kernels were considered in ref .
the joint age - degree distribution evolves according to the rate equation @xmath100 the second term on the left accounts for the aging of nodes .
we assume here that the probability of linking to a given node again depends only on its degree and not on its age .
finally , we again have used @xmath101 for the linear attachment kernel in the long - time limit .
the homogeneous form of this equation implies that solution should be self - similar .
thus we seek a solution as a function of the _ single _ variable @xmath102 rather than two separate variables . writing @xmath103 with @xmath104 , we convert eq .
( [ ck1 ] ) into the ordinary differential equation @xmath105 we omit the delta function term , since it merely provides the boundary condition @xmath106 , or @xmath107 .
the solution to this boundary - value problem may be simplified by assuming the exponential solution @xmath108 ; this is consistent with the boundary condition , provided that @xmath109 and @xmath110 .
this ansatz reduces the infinite set of rate equations ( [ fk1 ] ) into two elementary differential equations for @xmath111 and @xmath112 whose solutions are @xmath113 and @xmath114 . in terms of the original variables of @xmath97 and @xmath22 , the joint age - degree distribution is then @xmath115    thus the degree distribution for fixed - age nodes decays _ exponentially _ , with a characteristic degree that diverges as @xmath116 for @xmath117 . as expected , young nodes ( those with @xmath118 ) typically have a small degree while old nodes have large degree ( fig .
[ age ] ) .
it is the large characteristic degree of old nodes that ultimately leads to a _ power - law _ total degree distribution when the joint age - degree distribution is integrated over all ages .
.,scaledwidth=40.0% ]      the rate equation approach is sufficiently versatile that we can also obtain much deeper geometrical properties of growing networks .
one such property is the correlation between degrees of connected nodes @xcite .
these develop naturally because a node with large degree is likely to be old .
thus its ancestor is also old and hence also has a large degree . in the context of the web
, this correlation merely expresses that obvious fact that it is more likely that popular web sites have hyperlinks among each other rather than to marginal sites .    to quantify the node degree correlation
, we define @xmath119 as the number of nodes of degree @xmath0 that attach to an ancestor node of degree @xmath120 ( fig .
[ corr - def ] ) .
for example , in the network of fig .
[ network ] , there are @xmath121 nodes of degree 1 , with @xmath122 .
there are also @xmath123 nodes of degree 2 , with @xmath124 , and @xmath125 nodes of degree 3 , with @xmath126 .     for the case @xmath127 and @xmath128.,scaledwidth=20.0% ]    for simplicity , we again specialize to the case of the strictly linear attachment kernel .
more general kernels can also be treated within our general framework @xcite . for the linear attachment kernel ,
the degree correlation @xmath119 evolves according to the rate equation @xmath129 the processes that gives rise to each term in this equation are illustrated in fig .
[ corr - re ] . the first two terms on the right account for the change in @xmath130 due to the addition of a link onto a node of degree @xmath13 ( gain ) or @xmath0 ( loss )
respectively , while the second set of terms gives the change in @xmath130 due to the addition of a link onto the ancestor node .
finally , the last term accounts for the gain in @xmath131 due to the addition of a new node .    ) .
the newly - added node and link are shown dashed.,scaledwidth=70.0% ]    as in the case of the node degree , the time dependence can be separated as @xmath132 .
this reduces eqs .
( [ nkl ] ) to the time - independent recursion relation , @xmath133 this can be further reduced to a constant - coefficient inhomogeneous recursion relation by the substitution @xmath134 to yield @xmath135 solving eqs .
( [ a ] ) for the first few @xmath0 yields the pattern of dependence on @xmath0 and @xmath120 from which one can then infer the solution @xmath136 from which we ultimately obtain @xmath137.\end{aligned}\ ] ] the important feature of this result is that the joint distribution does not factorize , that is , @xmath138 .
this correlation between the degrees of connected nodes is an important distinction between the gn and classical random graphs .    while the solution of eq .
( [ nkl - sol ] ) is unwieldy , it greatly simplifies in the scaling regime , @xmath139 and @xmath140 with @xmath141 finite .
the scaled form of the solution is @xmath142 for fixed large @xmath0 , the distribution @xmath143 has a single maximum at @xmath144 .
thus a node whose degree @xmath0 is large is typically linked to another node whose degree is also large ; the typical degree of the ancestor is 37% that of the daughter node . in general , when @xmath0 and @xmath120 are both large and their ratio is different from one , the limiting behaviors of @xmath143 are @xmath145 here we explicitly see the absence of factorization in the degree correlation : @xmath146 .
in addition to elucidating the degree distribution and degree correlations , the rate equations can be applied to determine global properties .
one useful example is the _ out - component _ with respect to a given node * x *  this is the set of nodes that can be reached by following directed links that emanate from * x * ( fig .
[ in - out ] ) . in the context of the web
, this is the set of nodes that are reached by following hyperlinks that emanate from a fixed node to target nodes , and then iteratively following target nodes ad infinitum . in a similar vein
, one may enumerate all nodes that refer to a fixed node , plus all nodes that refer these daughter nodes , _
etc_. this progeny comprises the in - component to node * x *  the set from which * x * can be reached by following a path of directed links .
[ in - out ]      for simplicity , we study the in - component size distribution for the gn with a constant attachment kernel , @xmath147 .
we consider this kernel because many results about network components are _ independent _ of the form of the kernel and thus it suffices to consider the simplest situation ; the extension to more general attachment kernels is discussed in @xcite .    for the constant attachment kernel
, the number @xmath148 of in - components with @xmath149 nodes satisfies the rate equation @xmath150 the loss term accounts for processes in which the attachment of a new node to an in - component of size @xmath149 increases its size by one .
this gives a loss rate that is proportional to @xmath149 .
if there is more than one in - component of size @xmath149 they must be disjoint , so that the total loss rate for @xmath148 is simply @xmath151 .
a similar argument applies for the gain term .
finally , dividing by @xmath152 converts these rates to normalized probabilities . for the constant attachment kernel , @xmath153 , so asymptotically @xmath154 .
interestingly , eq .  ( [ ik ] ) is almost identical to the rate equations for the degree distribution for the gn with linear attachment kernel , except that the prefactor equals @xmath155 rather than @xmath156 .
this change in the normalization factor is responsible for shifting the exponent of the resulting distribution from @xmath6 to @xmath157 .    to determine @xmath148 , we again note , by explicitly solving the first few of the rate equations , that each @xmath158 grows linearly in time .
thus we substitute @xmath159 into eqs .
( [ ik ] ) to obtain @xmath160 and @xmath161 .
this immediately gives @xmath162 this @xmath163 tail for the in - component distribution is a robust feature , _ independent _ of the form of the attachment kernel @xcite .
this @xmath163 tail also agrees with recent measurements of the web @xcite .
the complementary out - component from each node can be determined by constructing a mapping between the out - component and an underlying network `` genealogy '' .
we build a genealogical tree for the gn by taking generation @xmath164 to be the initial node .
nodes that attach to those in generation @xmath165 form generation @xmath166 ; the node index does not matter in this characterization . for example , in the network of fig .
[ network ] , node 1 is the `` ancestor '' of 6 , while 10 is the `` descendant '' of 6 and there are 5 nodes in generation @xmath167 and 4 in @xmath168 .
this leads to the genealogical tree of fig .
[ genealogy ] .    .
the nodes indices indicate when each is introduced .
the nodes are also arranged according to generation number.,scaledwidth=35.0% ]    [ genealogy ]    the genealogical tree provides a convenient way to characterize the out - component distribution .
as one can directly verify from fig .
[ genealogy ] , the number @xmath169 of out - components with @xmath149 nodes equals @xmath170 , the number of nodes in generation @xmath171 in the genealogical tree .
we therefore compute @xmath172 , the size of generation @xmath165 at time @xmath22 . for this discussion
, we again treat only the constant attachment kernel and refer the reader to ref .
@xcite for more general attachment kernels .
we determine @xmath172 by noting that @xmath172 increases when a new node attaches to a node in generation @xmath173 .
this occurs with rate @xmath174 , where @xmath175 is the number of nodes .
this gives the differential equation for @xmath176 with solution @xmath177 , where @xmath178 .
thus the number @xmath169 of out - components with @xmath149 nodes equals @xmath179 note that the generation size @xmath172 grows with @xmath165 , when @xmath180 , and then decreases and becomes of order 1 when @xmath181 .
the genealogical tree therefore contains approximately @xmath182 generations at time @xmath22 .
this result allows us to determine the diameter of the network , since the maximum distance between any pair of nodes is twice the distance from the root to the last generation .
therefore the diameter of the network scales as @xmath183 ; this is the same dependence on @xmath184 as in the random graph @xcite .
more importantly , this result shows that the diameter of the gn is always small  ranging from the order of @xmath185 for a constant attachment kernel , to the order of one for super - linear attachment kernels .
in the world - wide web , link directionality is clearly relevant , as hyperlinks go _ from _ an issuing website _ to _ a target website but not vice versa .
thus to characterize the local graph structure more fully , the node degree should be resolved into the _ in - degree _  the number of incoming links to a node , and the complementary _ out - degree _
[ degrees ] ) .
measurements on the web indicate that these distributions are power laws with different exponents @xcite .
these properties can be accounted for by the web graph ( wg ) model ( fig .
[ io - growth ] ) and the rate equations provide an extremely convenient analysis tool .
let us first determine the average node degrees ( in - degree , out - degree , and total degree ) of the wg .
let @xmath186 be the total number of nodes , and @xmath187 and @xmath188 the in - degree and out - degree of the entire network , respectively . according to the elemental growth steps of the model , these degrees evolve by one of the following two possibilities : @xmath189 that is , with probability @xmath8 a new node and new directed link
are created ( fig .
[ io - growth ] ) so that the number of nodes and both the total in- and out - degrees increase by one .
conversely , with probability @xmath190 a new directed link is created and the in- and out - degrees each increase by one , while the total number of nodes is unchanged . as a result , @xmath191 , and @xmath192 .
thus the average in- and out - degrees , @xmath193 and @xmath194 , are both equal to @xmath195 .
to determine the degree distributions , we need to specify : ( i ) the _ attachment rate _
@xmath196 , defined as the probability that a newly - introduced node links to an existing node with @xmath56 incoming and @xmath57 outgoing links , and ( ii ) the _ creation rate _
@xmath197 , defined as the probability of adding a new link from a @xmath198 node to a @xmath199 node .
we will use rates that are expected to occur in the web .
clearly , the attachment and creation rates should be non - decreasing in @xmath56 and @xmath57 .
moreover , it seems intuitively plausible that the attachment rate depends only on the in - degree of the target node , @xmath200 ; _ i.e. _ , a website designer decides to create link to a target based only on the popularity of the latter . in the same spirit , we take the link creation rate to depend only on the out - degree of the issuing node and the in - degree of the target node , @xmath201 . the former property reflects the fact that the development rate of a site depends only on the number of outgoing links .    the interesting situation of power - law degree distributions arises for asymptotically linear rates , and we therefore consider @xmath202 the parameters @xmath203 and @xmath204 must satisfy the constraint @xmath205 and @xmath206 to ensure that the rates are positive for all attainable in- and out - degree values , @xmath207 and @xmath208 .    with these rates , the joint degree distribution , @xmath209 , defined as
the average number of nodes with @xmath56 incoming and @xmath57 outgoing links , evolves according to @xmath210\\   & & \hskip 0.285 in   + q\left[{(j-1+\lambda_{\rm out})n_{i , j-1 } -(j+\lambda_{\rm out})n_{ij}\over j+\lambda_{\rm out } n}\right ] + p\,\delta_{i0}\delta_{j1}.\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] the first group of terms on the right accounts for the changes in the in - degree of target nodes by simultaneous creation of a new node and link ( probability @xmath8 ) or by creation of a new link only ( probability @xmath190 ) .
for example , the creation of a link to a node with in - degree @xmath56 leads to a loss in the number of such nodes .
this occurs with rate @xmath211 , divided by the appropriate normalization factor @xmath212 .
the factor @xmath213 in eq .
( [ nij ] ) is explicitly written to make clear these two types of processes .
similarly , the second group of terms account for out - degree changes .
these occur due to the creation of new links between already existing nodes  hence the prefactor @xmath190 .
the last term accounts for the introduction of new nodes with no incoming links and one outgoing link . as a useful consistency check
, one may verify that the total number of nodes , @xmath214 , grows according to @xmath215 , while the total in- and out - degrees , @xmath216 and @xmath217 , obey @xmath218 .    by solving the first few of eqs .
( [ nij ] ) , it is again clear that the @xmath219 grow linearly with time .
accordingly , we substitute @xmath220 , as well as @xmath221 and @xmath222 , into eqs .
( [ nij ] ) to yield a recursion relation for @xmath223 . using the shorthand notations , @xmath224 the recursion relation for @xmath223 is @xmath225n_{ij }
= ( i-1+\lambda_{\rm in})n_{i-1,j}+a(j-1+\lambda_{\rm out})n_{i , j-1 } + p(1+p\lambda_{\rm in})\delta_{i0}\delta_{j1}.\end{aligned}\ ] ] the in - degree and out - degree distributions are straightforwardly expressed through the joint distribution : @xmath226 and @xmath227 . because of the linear time dependence of the node degrees , we write @xmath228 and @xmath229 . the densities @xmath230 and @xmath231 satisfy    [ ii ] ( i+b)i_i & = & ( i-1+_in)i_i-1 + p(1+p_in)_i0 , + ( j+1q+_outq)o_j & = & ( j-1+_out)o_j-1+p1+p_outq_j1 ,    respectively . the solution to these recursion formulae may be expressed in terms of the following ratios of gamma functions    [ i - sol ] i_i&=&i_0(i+_in)(b+1)(i+b+1)(_in ) , + [ o - sol ] o_j&=&o_1(j+_out ) ( 2+q^-1+_out q^-1 ) ( j+1+q^-1+_out q^-1)(1+_out ) ,    with @xmath232 and @xmath233 .    from the asymptotics of the gamma function , the asymptotic behavior of the in- and out - degree distributions have the distinct power law forms @xcite ,
[ in ] i_i~i^-_in ,  _
in&=&2+p_in , + 0.7 in o_j~j^-_out , _ out&=&1+q^-1+_out pq^-1 ,    with @xmath234 and @xmath235 both necessarily greater than 2 .
let us now compare these predictions with current data for the web @xcite .
first , the value of @xmath8 is fixed by noting that @xmath236 equals the average degree of the entire network .
current data for the web gives @xmath237 , and thus we set @xmath238 . now
( [ in ] ) contain two free parameters and by choosing them to be @xmath239 and @xmath240 we reproduced the observed exponents for the degree distributions of the web , @xmath241 and @xmath242 , respectively .
the fact that the parameters @xmath203 and @xmath204 are of the order of one indicates that the model with linear rates of node attachment and bilinear rates of link creation is a viable description of the web .
in addition to the degree distributions , current measurements indicate that the web consists of a `` giant '' component that contains approximately 91% of all nodes , and a large number of finite components @xcite .
the models discussed thus far are unsuited to describe the number and size distribution of these components , since the growth rules necessarily produce only a single connected component . in this section
, we outline a simple modification of the wg , the multicomponent graph ( mg ) , that naturally produces many components . in this example
, the rate equations now provide a comprehensive characterization for the size distribution of the components .    in the mg model , we simply separate node and link creation steps .
namely , when a node is introduced it does not immediately attach to an earlier node , but rather , a new node begins its existence as isolated and joins the network only when a link creation event reaches the new node . for the average network degrees , this small modification already has a significant effect .
the number of nodes and the total in- and out - degrees of the network , @xmath243 now increase with time as @xmath221 and @xmath244 .
thus the in- and out - degrees of each node are time independent and equal to @xmath245 , while the total degree is @xmath246 .    as in the case of the wg model , we study the case of a bilinear link creation rate given in eq .
( [ ac ] ) , with now @xmath247 to ensure that @xmath248 for all permissible in- and out - degrees , @xmath207 and @xmath249 .
we study local characteristics by employing the same approach as in the wg model .
we find that results differ only in minute details , _
e.g. _ , the in- and out - degree densities @xmath230 and @xmath231 are again the ratios of gamma functions , and the respective exponents are @xmath250 notice the decoupling  the in - degree exponent is independent of @xmath204 , while @xmath235 is independent of @xmath251 .
the expressions ( [ inout ] ) are neater than their wg counterparts , reflecting the fact that the governing rules of the mg model are more symmetric .
to complement our discussion , we now outline the asymptotic behavior of the joint in- and out - degree distribution .
although this distribution defies general analysis , we can obtain partial and useful information by fixing one index and letting the other index vary .
an elementary but cumbersome analysis yields following limiting behaviors @xmath252 with @xmath253    we also can determine the joint degree distribution analytically in the subset of the parameter space where @xmath254 , _
i.e. _ , @xmath255 . in what follows ,
we therefore denote @xmath256 .
the resulting recursion equation for the joint degree distribution is @xmath257 with @xmath258 . because the degrees @xmath56 and @xmath57 appear in eq .
( [ nij * ] ) with equal prefactors , the substitution @xmath259 reduces eqs .
( [ nij * ] ) into the constant - coefficient recursion relation @xmath260 we solve eq .  ( [ m ] ) by employing the generating function technique .
multiplying eq .
( [ m ] ) by @xmath261 and summing over all @xmath262 , we find that the generating function @xmath263 equals @xmath264 .
expanding @xmath265 in @xmath266 yields @xmath267 which we then expand in @xmath268 by employing the identity @xmath269 .
finally , we arrive at @xmath270 from which the joint degree distribution is @xmath271 thus again , the in- and out - degrees of a node are correlated : @xmath272 .
let us now turn now to the distribution of connected components ( clusters , for brevity ) . for simplicity , we consider models with undirected links .
let us first estimate the total number of clusters @xmath273 . at each time step , @xmath274 with probability @xmath8 , or @xmath275 with probability @xmath190 .
this implies @xmath276 the gain rate of @xmath273 is exactly equal to @xmath8 , while in the loss term we ignore self - connections and tacitly assume that links are always created between different clusters . in the long - time limit , self - connections should be asymptotically negligible when the total number of clusters grows with time and no macroscopic clusters ( _ i.e. _ , components that contain a finite fraction of all nodes ) arise .
this assumption of no self - connections greatly simplifies the description of the cluster merging process .
consider two clusters ( labeled by @xmath277 ) with total in - degrees @xmath278 , out - degrees @xmath279 , and number of nodes @xmath280 .
when these clusters merge , the combined cluster is characterized by @xmath281 thus starting with single - node clusters with @xmath282 , the above merging rule leads to clusters that always satisfy the constraint @xmath283 .
thus the size @xmath0 characterizes both the in - degree and out - degree of clusters .    to simplify formulae without sacrificing generality
, we consider the link creation rate of eq .
( [ ac ] ) , with @xmath284 .
then the merging rate @xmath285 of the two clusters is proportional to @xmath286 , or @xmath287 let @xmath288 denotes the number of clusters of mass @xmath0 .
this distribution evolves according to @xmath289 the first set of terms account for the gain in @xmath288 due to the coalescence of clusters of size @xmath290 and @xmath291 , with @xmath292 .
similarly , the second set of terms accounts for the loss in @xmath288 due to the coalescence of a cluster of size @xmath0 with any other cluster .
the last term accounts for the input of unit - size clusters .
these rate equations are similar to those of irreversible aggregation with product kernel @xcite .
the primary difference is that we explicitly treat the number of clusters as finite .
one can verify that the total number of nodes @xmath293 grows with rate @xmath8 and that the total number of clusters @xmath294 grows with rate @xmath295 , in agreement with eq .
( [ n ] ) . solving the first few eqs .
( [ comp ] ) shows again that @xmath288 grow linearly with time .
accordingly , we substitute @xmath296 into eqs .
( [ comp ] ) to yield the time - independent recursion relation @xmath297    a giant component , _
i.e. _ , a cluster that contains a finite fraction of all the nodes , emerges when the link creation rate exceeds a threshold value . to determine this threshold , we study the moments of the cluster size distribution @xmath298 .
we already know that the first two moments are @xmath299 and @xmath300 .
we can obtain an equation for the second moment by multiplying eq .
( [ mk ] ) by @xmath301 and summing over @xmath302 to give @xmath303 .
when this equation has a real solution , @xmath304 is finite .
the solution is @xmath305 and gives , when @xmath306 , to a threshold value @xmath307 . for @xmath308 ( @xmath309 )
all clusters have finite size and the second moment is finite .    in this steady - state regime , we can obtain the cluster size distribution by introducing the generating function @xmath310 to convert eq .
( [ mk ] ) into the differential equation @xmath311/q}.\ ] ] the asymptotic behavior of the cluster size distribution can now be read off from the behavior of the generating function in the @xmath312 limit .
in particular , the power - law behavior @xmath313 implies that the corresponding generating function has the form @xmath314 here the asymptotic behavior is controlled by the dominant singular term @xmath315
. however , there are also subdominant singular terms and regular terms in the generating function . in eq .
( [ gen ] ) we explicitly included the three regular terms which ensure that the first three moments of the cluster - size distribution are correctly reproduced , namely , @xmath316 , @xmath317 , and @xmath318 .    finally , substituting eq .
( [ gen ] ) into eq .
( [ cz ] ) we find that the dominant singular terms are of the order of @xmath319 .
balancing all contributions of this order in the equation determines the exponent of the cluster size distribution to be @xmath320 this exponent satisfies the bound @xmath321 and thus justifies using the behavior of the second moment of the size distribution as the criterion to find the threshold value @xmath322 .    for @xmath323
there is no giant cluster and the cluster size distribution has a power - law tail with @xmath324 given by eq .
( [ tau ] ) .
intriguingly , the power - law form holds for any value @xmath309 .
this is in stark contrast to all other percolation - type phenomena , where away from the threshold , there is an exponential tail in cluster size distributions @xcite .
thus in contrast to ordinary critical phenomena , the entire range @xmath309 is critical .    as a corollary to the power - law tail of the cluster size distribution for @xmath309
, we can estimate the size of the largest cluster @xmath325 to see how `` finite '' it really is . using the extreme statistics criterion
@xmath326 we obtain @xmath327 , or @xmath328 this is very different from the corresponding behavior on the random graph , where below the percolation threshold the largest component scales logarithmically with the number of nodes .
thus for the random graph , the dependence of @xmath329 changes from @xmath185 just below , to @xmath184 , just above the percolation threshold ; for the mg , the change is much more gentle : from @xmath330 to @xmath184 .
these considerations suggest that the phase transition in the mg is dramatically different from the percolation transition . very recently
, simplified versions of the mg were studied @xcite .
numerical @xcite and analytical @xcite evidence suggest that the size of the giant component @xmath331 near the threshold scales as @xmath332 therefore , the phase transition of this dynamically grown network is of infinite order since all derivatives of @xmath331 vanish as @xmath333 . in contrast , static random graphs with any desired degree distribution @xcite exhibit a standard percolation transition @xcite .
in this paper , we have presented a statistical physics viewpoint on growing network problems .
this perspective is strongly influenced by the phenomenon of aggregation kinetics , where the rate equation approach has proved extremely useful . from the wide range of results that we were able to obtain for evolving networks , we hope that the reader appreciates both the simplicity and the power of the rate equation method for characterizing evolving networks .
we quantified the degree distribution of the growing network model and found a diverse range of phenomenology that depends on the form of the attachment kernel . at the qualitative level , a stretched exponential form for the degree distribution
should be regarded as `` generic '' , since it occurs for an attachment kernel that is sub - linear in node degree ( _ e.g. _ , @xmath44 with @xmath2 ) . on the other hand ,
a power - law degree distribution arises only for linear attachment kernels , @xmath51 .
however , this result is `` non - generic '' as the degree distribution exponent now depends on the detailed form of the attachment kernel .
we investigated extensions of the basic growing network to incorporate processes that naturally occur in the development in the web .
in particular , by allowing for link directionality , the full degree distribution naturally resolves into independent in - degree and out - degree distributions . when the rates at which links are created are linear functions of the in- and out - degrees of the terminal nodes of the link , the in- and out - degree distributions are power laws with different exponents , @xmath234 and @xmath235 , that match with current measurements on the web with reasonable values for the model parameters .
we also considered a model with independent node and link creation rates .
this leads to a network with many independent components and now the size distribution of these components is an important characteristic .
we have characterized basic aspects of this process by the rate equation approach and showed that the network is in a critical state even away from the percolation threshold .
the rate equation approach also provides evidence of an unusual , infinite - order percolation transition .    while statistical physics tools have fueled much progress in elucidating the structure of growing networks , there are still many open questions .
one set is associated with understanding dynamical processes in such networks .
for example , what is the nature of information transmission ? what governs the formation of traffic jams on the web ?
another set is concerned with growth mechanisms . while we can make much progress in characterizing networks with idealized growth rules , it is important to understand the actual rules that govern the growth of the internet .
these issues appear to be fruitful challenges for future research .
it is a pleasure to thank francois leyvraz and geoff rodgers for collaborations that led to some of the work reported here .
we also thank john byers and mark crovella for numerous informative discussions .
finally , we are grateful to nsf grants int9600232 and dmr9978902 for financial support .      recent reviews from the physicist s perspective include : s.  h.  strogatz , nature * 410 * , 268 ( 2001 ) ; r.  albert and a .-
barabsi , rev .
phys .  * 74 * , 47 ( 2002 ) ; s.  n.  dorogovtsev and j.  f.  f.  mendes , adv .
xx * , xxx ( 2002 ) .
s.  r.  kumar , p.  raphavan , s.  rajagopalan , and a.  tomkins , in : _ proc .
8th www conf . _
( 1999 ) ; s.  r.  kumar , p.  raphavan , s.  rajagopalan , and a.  tomkins , in : _ proc .
25th vldb conf . _
( 1999 ) ; j.  kleinberg , r.  kumar , p.  raghavan , s.  rajagopalan , and a.  tomkins , in : _ proceedings of the international conference on combinatorics and computing _ , lecture notes in computer science , vol .
1627 ( springer - verlag , berlin , 1999 ) .


complex networks have been the focus of the study of dynamical properties of complex systems in nature and society in the last decade @xcite . usually all nodes are assumed to belong to one population or class , and the interactions between two distinct populations have been reported just recently @xcite .
the dynamical properties of two interacting populations , extroverts and introverts were recently studied using dynamical network evolution model @xcite .
buldyrev et al @xcite developed a framework for understanding the robustness of interacting networks .
using the generating functions method they present the exact analytical solutions for the critical fraction of nodes , which upon removal , will lead to a complete fragmentation into interdependent networks .
the focus of the current approach in understanding the formation and evolution of terrorist networks is on middle - range perspective as opposed to the micro - level approach that considers individual terrorist and macro - level analysis of the root causes of terrorism @xcite . in particular , the interest is in placing the relationships between individuals in the context of ( i ) their interactions with each other , ( ii ) how they are influenced by ideas originating from their environment , ( iii ) their interactions with people and organizations outside of their group @xcite . motivated by this description which conceptually refers to a complex system and because networks provide a fruitful framework to model complex systems @xcite , we introduce a network model that aims to describe the interactions between potentially terrorist and non - terrorist populations .
our goal is to present a model of a social network that contains two types of agents which demonstrate different affinities in establishing connections within their own population versus connections with the other population .
we also aim that the model is simple enough to allow the derivation of approximate analytical expressions of the basic characteristics of the network .
the latter can be achieved in the general framework of rate equation theory in the mean field approximation which has been introduced to study fundamental characteristics of growing network models @xcite . within this framework
we introduce the rate equations that are specific to our model , solve them and obtain analytical expressions that predict the growth dynamics of the degree of individual vertices .    , the initial contact @xmath2 and the secondary contact @xmath3 .
( a)-(d ) show the connections when the new node is an @xmath1 node .
( e)-(h ) show the connections when the new node is a @xmath0 node .
empty symbols ( @xmath4 ) mark an @xmath1 node while full symbols ( @xmath5 ) mark a @xmath0 node .
full lines represent links between nodes of the same type , e.g. friends , such as @xmath6 or @xmath7 .
dashed lines represent links between nodes of different types such as @xmath8 , e.g. enemies . ]    while the probability to create initial connections is easily defined , the probability for the secondary contacts between nodes is difficult to derive because of the interactions between the two types of nodes .
as a first approximation , we assume that the initial and secondary contacts form edges with the same probabilities .
to include a more precise contribution of both the initial and the secondary contacts in the rate equations we empirically obtain their functional dependences .
this leads to an improved agreement between analytical and numerical simulation results .    from the functional dependence of the degree of a node as a function of time using the mean - field arguments
, we derive the degree distribution for each of the two types of nodes .
we also derive analytical expressions of the structural , three - point correlations between nodes to study the clustering properties of the networks .
the network models are broadly classified into two categories : the network evolution models in which addition of new edges depends on the local structure of the network , and nodal attribute models in which the existence of edges is determined solely by the attributes of the nodes ( for review see @xcite ) .
the network evolution models can be further categorized into growing network evolution models and dynamical network evolution models . in the former
the network growth starts with a small seed network and nodes and links are added according to specific rules until the network reaches a predetermined size .
dynamical network evolution models start with an empty network and edges are added and deleted according to specific rules until statistical properties of the network stabilize .    in this paper , we propose a model that incorporates a growing network evolution process with nodal attributes which could be thought of as a new class of model .
the model has five free parameters , three describing the growing network evolution process and two describing nodal attributes .
the parameters of the growing network evolution process are the number of nodes @xmath9 , the average number of nodes selected at random as initial contacts @xmath10 , and the average number of nodes selected as secondary contacts @xmath11 among the neighbors of each initial contact @xcite .
two parameters quantify the type and amount of nodes , non - violent @xmath1 or potentially violent @xmath0 nodes and the type of interactions between them which are as follows : ( i ) nodes are randomly marked as non - violent @xmath1 with probability @xmath12 and potentially violent @xmath0 with probability @xmath13 ; ( ii ) when establishing initial contacts , nodes connect with probability @xmath14 if the nodes are of the same type , such as @xmath0 with @xmath0 or @xmath1 with @xmath1 , or with probability @xmath15 if the nodes are of different types such as @xmath1 with @xmath0 nodes .
the secondary contacts are established with nodes among the neighbors of the initial contacts .
the model combines the random attachment of initial contacts with the implicit preferential attachment of the secondary contacts . in that
, the model represents a generalization with two types of node attributes of growing models such as @xcite .
the definition of establishing edges can be thought of as creating links between friends ( solid lines in fig .
[ fig1 ] ) or between enemies ( dashed lines ) . by varying the value of @xmath14
, we can generate different strengths of friendliness or animosity .
the possible configurations of triads that arise in social networks in such a context are : ( a ) three friendly interactions ; ( b ) one friendly and two unfriendly connections ; ( c ) two friendly interactions and one unfriendly ; ( d ) three unfriendly interactions @xcite . according to the strong formulation of structural balance theory in social sciences , configurations ( a ) and ( b ) are considered stable while ( c ) and ( d ) are unstable and likely to break apart @xcite . in their empirical large - scale verification of the long - standing structural balance theory
, the authors of @xcite find that the unstable triads , especially formation ( c ) are extremely underrepresented in an online social system in comparison to a null model .
our model produces correctly the stable configurations ( a ) ( fig .
[ fig1]a , e ) and ( b ) ( fig .
[ fig1]b - d , f - h ) but can not produce the unstable configurations ( c ) and ( d ) in accordance with the strong formulation of the structural balance theory @xcite .
the model algorithm consists of the following steps : ( 1 ) start with a seed network of @xmath16 connected nodes among which some are @xmath1 and some are @xmath0 , depending on @xmath12 ; ( 2 ) at each time step add a new node , which has probability @xmath12 to be a non - violent and @xmath13 to be a violent node ; ( 3 ) select on average @xmath17 random nodes as initial contacts . the probability to connect the same type of nodes is @xmath14 while @xmath15 is the probability for initial contacts if they are of different types .
( 4 ) select on average @xmath18 nodes among the neighbors of each initial contact as secondary contacts .
connecting the new node with the secondary contacts is done without checking if it is the same type of node or not .
there are two reasons for this choice .
( i ) because the probability to establish inter - population connections ( @xmath14 ) is higher than the probability to connect nodes intra - population ( @xmath19 ) , it is more likely that the first contact and its neighbors ( potential secondary contacts ) are of the same type than of different types .
therefore the secondary contacts will be more likely to be intra - population contacts even without explicitly modifying their probability to connect based on the type .
( ii ) the secondary contacts are meant to mimic the ` friend - of - a - friend ' type of contacts in the real world , and we think that the implicit preferences given by the existing network connections would more accurately describe the nature of such contacts without including an explicit separate probability
. apply steps ( 2 ) to ( 4 ) until the network reaches the necessary size .
we start with constructing the rate equations that describe the change of the degree of a node on average during one time step of the network growth process for each of the non - violent @xmath1 and violent @xmath0 nodes .
the degree of a node grows via two processes .
one is the random attachment of connecting a new node to @xmath10 nodes that are its initial contacts .
the second process is when the new node is further connected to the @xmath11 nodes among the neighbors of the initial contacts . in the following
we assume that the probability of this second process is linear with respect to the degree of the node which leads to implicit preferential attachment .
the rate equations are : @xmath20 @xmath21 where @xmath22 is the degree of node @xmath3 and we assumed that @xmath23 and @xmath24 .
all possible combinations of triads of a new node @xmath25 , the initial contact @xmath2 , and the secondary contact @xmath3 are schematically shown in fig .
[ fig1](a - h ) and presented by the third through the sixth terms in eq .
( [ n ] ) and eq .
( [ v ] ) for an @xmath1 and @xmath0 node , respectively .
for example , the fifth term in eq .
( [ n ] ) describes the rate of change of the degree of vertex @xmath3 ( which is an @xmath1 node ) due to establishing the configuration of contacts shown in fig .
the fifth term contains four factors .
the first factor is the average number of secondary contacts which is @xmath26 .
@xmath27 is the probability that the new node created at time step @xmath28 is a @xmath0 node .
@xmath14 is the probability that the newly created node connects to the initial contact which is a node of the same type .
finally , @xmath29 is the probability that the node selected for initial contact ( node @xmath2 in fig .
[ fig1]c ) shares an edge with the node @xmath3 .
this is a standard expression for preferential attachment except for the complications induced by having two distinct populations .
the nominator @xmath30 is the degree of the @xmath3 node if we count only the links to different types of nodes ( in this case @xmath0 nodes ) .
the denominator is the sum of all possible links which the type of node selected for initial contact ( in this case @xmath0 ) could have . assuming that the initial and secondary contacts are created with the same probabilities the nominator would be equal to @xmath24 and we will approximate it in this way and the denominator would be equal to @xmath31 .
we will use this expression as a first approximation and we will also empirically derive functional dependences of the denominator and compare the results .
note that the number of edges , multiplied by two , that exist between @xmath1 and @xmath1 nodes is equal to @xmath32 and include both edges created as initial contacts and edges created as secondary contacts .
the same is true for the number of edges between @xmath0 and @xmath0 nodes which is @xmath33 , and the number of edges between @xmath1 and @xmath0 nodes which is @xmath34 in eqs .
( [ n ] ) and ( [ v ] ) .
we know that the probabilities for creating edges as initial contacts are @xmath14 or @xmath19 if between same type of nodes or different types of nodes , respectively .
we do not know , however , what these probabilities are when the edges represent connections to secondary contacts .
this is the reason to express the respective summations by the following relations :    [ sms ] @xmath35    eqs .
( [ sms ] ) contain the term @xmath36 because there are @xmath37 vertices at time @xmath28 and @xmath38 is the average initial degree of a vertex .
@xmath39 in eq .
( [ snn ] ) is the probability that the edge is between @xmath1 nodes . @xmath40
( [ svv ] ) is the probability that the edge is between @xmath0 nodes , and @xmath41 eq .
( [ snv ] ) is the probability that the edge is between nodes of different types .
functions @xmath42 , @xmath43 , and @xmath44 contain edges established due to both initial and secondary contacts , whose contributions can not be separated and derived analytically . therefore , we will obtain these functional dependences through empirical considerations . if we assume that the edges to secondary contacts are established with the same probabilities as the edges to initial contacts , then the relations would have been :    [ simple ] @xmath45      after separating the variables and integrating the rate equation of the degree @xmath46 of @xmath1 node eq.([n ] ) from @xmath47 to @xmath22 and from @xmath48 to @xmath28 we obtain the following expression for the degree as a function of time @xmath49 @xmath50 where    [ knt ] @xmath51    integrating the rate equation of the degree @xmath22 of @xmath0 nodes , eq.([v ] ) produces the time dependence of the degree of any @xmath0 node @xmath52 where    [ kvt ] @xmath53    if we assume that the edges to secondary contacts are established with the same probabilities as the edges to initial contacts , then the solution of the rate equation eq .
( [ n ] ) will be the following for an @xmath1 node @xmath54 where    [ knts ] @xmath55    and for a @xmath0 node : @xmath56 where    [ kvts ] @xmath57    after making use of eqs .
( [ simple ] ) .      in the mean field approximation
, the degree @xmath49 of a node @xmath3 evolves with time @xmath28 strictly monotonically after the node was added to the network at time @xmath48 .
therefore , the nodes added to the network more recently will have on average lower degree than those added to the network earlier . assuming that we add nodes to the network at equal intervals , the probability density of @xmath48 is @xmath58 . using the properties of cumulative probability distribution function
, we can write that the probability of a node to have degree @xmath59 is equal to the probability that the node has been added to the network at time @xmath60 @xmath61 we can derive the probability density function of @xmath1 nodes , @xmath62 by obtaining an expression for @xmath63 from eq .  ( [ kin ] ) , then replacing it in eq .
( [ cdf ] ) and differentiating the resultant equation with respect to @xmath64 , which is @xmath65 .
the result is : @xmath66 similarly , we can derive the probability density function of @xmath0 nodes , @xmath67 by obtaining an expression for @xmath68 from eq .
( [ kiv ] ) , then replacing it in eq .
( [ cdf ] ) and differentiating the resultant equation with respect to @xmath64 to obtain : @xmath69 if we use eqs .
( [ kins ] ) and ( [ kivs ] ) to derive expressions for @xmath63 and @xmath68 , respectively , then the degree distributions are presented by @xmath70 @xmath71 it should be noted that @xmath22 and all quantities are expectation values and can be compared to simulation results which are assemble averages .
the analytical results converge to those reported in ref .
@xcite in the limit of one population which means @xmath72 , @xmath73 , @xmath74 , and @xmath75 .
the dependence of the clustering coefficient as a function of the degree of a node can be derived using the rate equation method @xcite . the number of triangles @xmath76 ( @xmath77 ) around a node if @xmath3 is an @xmath1 ( @xmath0 ) node is changing with time following two processes .
the first process is when node @xmath3 is selected as one of the initial contacts with probability @xmath78 ( @xmath79 ) and the new node links to some of its neighbors which are @xmath11 on average .
the second process is when node @xmath3 is selected as a secondary contact and a triangle is formed between the new node , the initial contact , and the secondary contact .
it is possible that two neighboring initial contacts and the new node form a triangle , but the contribution of this process is negligible .
the rate equation for the number of connections between the nearest neighbors of a node of degree @xmath80 ( @xmath81 ) is given by @xmath82 @xmath83 respectively .
after some algebra and using eq .
( [ n ] ) if @xmath3 is an @xmath1 node and eq .
( [ v ] ) if @xmath3 is a @xmath0 node we obtain @xmath84 and @xmath85 after integrating both sides of eqs .
( [ en1 ] ) and ( [ ev1 ] ) with respect to @xmath28 , using the initial condition @xmath86 , and @xmath47 given by eq .
( [ knt6 ] ) , we obtain the expressions for the change with time of the number of connections between the nearest neighbors of a node of degree @xmath80 @xmath87 if @xmath3 is an @xmath1 node and of a node of degree @xmath81 @xmath88 if @xmath3 is a @xmath0 node .
we use eqs .
( [ pn ] ) and ( [ pv ] ) to obtain expressions for @xmath89 and insert them in eqs .
( [ en2 ] ) and ( [ ev2 ] ) , respectively .
finally , the degree - dependent clustering coefficient @xmath90 as a function of the degree @xmath91 of the node which is also referred as the clustering spectrum , is given by @xmath92 } { k(k-1 ) } \label{ckn}\ ] ] for an @xmath1 node and by @xmath93 } { k(k-1 ) } \label{ckv}\ ] ] for a @xmath0 node , where we make use of @xmath94 $ ] , which defines the clustering coefficient of a vertex as the ratio of the total number of existing connections between all @xmath91 of its neighbors and the number @xmath95 of all possible connections between them .
the degree - dependent clustering coefficient @xmath90 defines the local clustering properties of the network .
the global clustering characteristics of a network include the mean clustering coefficient @xmath96 as averaged over the vertex degree , the mean clustering @xmath97 as averaged over the nodes of the network ( where @xmath98 is the clustering coefficient of node @xmath3 ) , and the so - called transitivity @xmath99 @xcite . making use of degree - dependent local clustering coefficient ( eqs .
( [ ckn ] ) and ( [ ckv ] ) ) and the degree distribution ( eqs .
( [ pns ] ) and ( [ pvs ] ) ) for @xmath1 or @xmath0 node
one can define the respective mean clustering coefficient as : @xmath100 transitivity is a measure of the ratio of the total number of loops of length three in a graph to the total number of connected triples and is defined as @xcite @xmath101 the mean clustering coefficient @xmath96 and the transitivity @xmath99 assess in a different manner the clustering properties of a graph . in real networks they could have very different values for the same network @xcite .
we compare three outputs : the analytical derivation of degree distribution @xmath102 ( eqs .
( [ pns ] ) and ( [ pvs ] ) ) that was obtained assuming that the links to secondary contacts are established with the same probabilities as the links to initial contacts eq .
( [ simple ] ) , the derivation of @xmath102 ( eqs .
( [ pn ] ) and ( [ pv ] ) ) obtained by using functional dependences eq .
( [ sms ] ) , and the numerical simulation results .
nodes @xmath39 as a function of @xmath103 , where @xmath104 for @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath107 for @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) .
( b ) probability to establish both initial and secondary contacts between @xmath0 nodes @xmath110 as a function of @xmath111 , where @xmath112 for @xmath113 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath114 for @xmath115 ( @xmath109 ) .
( c ) probability to establish both initial and secondary contacts between different types of nodes as a function of @xmath116 for @xmath117 $ ] at fixed @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) , and fixed @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) , respectively .
values on y - axis in ( a ) represent matrix multiplication of the vector of @xmath39 as a function of @xmath118 $ ] at fixed @xmath119 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath120 ( @xmath109 ) ) multiplied by the vector of normalized number of @xmath6 edges as a function of @xmath121 $ ] at fixed @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) ) .
values on y - axis in ( b ) represent matrix multiplication of the vector of @xmath110 as a function of @xmath122 $ ] at fixed @xmath119 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath120 ( @xmath109 ) ) multiplied by the vector of normalized number of @xmath7 edges as a function of @xmath121 $ ] at fixed @xmath113 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath115 ( @xmath109 ) ) .
case i : one node as initial contact and two nodes as secondary contacts .
, title="fig : " ]   nodes @xmath39 as a function of @xmath103 , where @xmath104 for @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath107 for @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) .
( b ) probability to establish both initial and secondary contacts between @xmath0 nodes @xmath110 as a function of @xmath111 , where @xmath112 for @xmath113 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath114 for @xmath115 ( @xmath109 ) .
( c ) probability to establish both initial and secondary contacts between different types of nodes as a function of @xmath116 for @xmath117 $ ] at fixed @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) , and fixed @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) , respectively .
values on y - axis in ( a ) represent matrix multiplication of the vector of @xmath39 as a function of @xmath118 $ ] at fixed @xmath119 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath120 ( @xmath109 ) ) multiplied by the vector of normalized number of @xmath6 edges as a function of @xmath121 $ ] at fixed @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) ) .
values on y - axis in ( b ) represent matrix multiplication of the vector of @xmath110 as a function of @xmath122 $ ] at fixed @xmath119 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath120 ( @xmath109 ) ) multiplied by the vector of normalized number of @xmath7 edges as a function of @xmath121 $ ] at fixed @xmath113 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath115 ( @xmath109 ) ) .
case i : one node as initial contact and two nodes as secondary contacts .
, title="fig : " ]   nodes @xmath39 as a function of @xmath103 , where @xmath104 for @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath107 for @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) .
( b ) probability to establish both initial and secondary contacts between @xmath0 nodes @xmath110 as a function of @xmath111 , where @xmath112 for @xmath113 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath114 for @xmath115 ( @xmath109 ) .
( c ) probability to establish both initial and secondary contacts between different types of nodes as a function of @xmath116 for @xmath117 $ ] at fixed @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) , and fixed @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) , respectively .
values on y - axis in ( a ) represent matrix multiplication of the vector of @xmath39 as a function of @xmath118 $ ] at fixed @xmath119 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath120 ( @xmath109 ) ) multiplied by the vector of normalized number of @xmath6 edges as a function of @xmath121 $ ] at fixed @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) ) .
values on y - axis in ( b ) represent matrix multiplication of the vector of @xmath110 as a function of @xmath122 $ ] at fixed @xmath119 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath120 ( @xmath109 ) ) multiplied by the vector of normalized number of @xmath7 edges as a function of @xmath121 $ ] at fixed @xmath113 ( @xmath106 ) ( @xmath115 ( @xmath109 ) ) .
case i : one node as initial contact and two nodes as secondary contacts .
, title="fig : " ]      first , let us focus on the functional dependence of the probability that the edge is between @xmath1 nodes @xmath123 on @xmath124 ( eq .
( [ snn ] ) ) , which represents the combined probabilities that the edge is between same type of nodes @xmath14 and the probability that they are @xmath1 nodes .
we empirically estimate @xmath39 by calculating the number of @xmath6 edges , multiplying it by two and dividing it by the average number of nodes at time @xmath28 which is @xmath125 .
we obtain the functional dependence of empirically estimated @xmath123 by a matrix multiplication of two vectors ; one is the vector of @xmath123 values as a function of @xmath12 at fixed @xmath119 and the other is the vector of @xmath123 values as a function of @xmath14 at fixed @xmath105 .
next , we aim to construct a function of @xmath12 and @xmath14 , @xmath126 such that the empirically estimated @xmath39 which express the probabilities for both initial and secondary contacts is a linear function of @xmath124 .
we plot the result for case i ( one initial contact and two secondary contacts ) in fig .
[ fig2]a for @xmath118 $ ] at fixed values of @xmath119 and for @xmath121 $ ] at fixed values of @xmath105 ( circles @xmath106 ) .
squares ( @xmath109 ) fig .
[ fig2]a mark results for @xmath118 $ ] at fixed values of @xmath120 and for @xmath121 $ ] at fixed values of @xmath108 .
we obtain that the combined probability @xmath126 of the form @xmath127 produces the following least - squares linear fit    [ parn ] @xmath128    for @xmath104 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath107 ( @xmath109 ) , respectively .
the prediction error estimate was generated for @xmath123 and found to be @xmath129 ( for @xmath106 ) and @xmath130 and ( for @xmath109 ) which allows us to obtain a range of values for @xmath123 limited by @xmath131 .
we use these functional dependences within their range to express @xmath39 in the solutions of the rate equations eqs .
( [ kin ] ) and ( [ kiv ] ) and in the expression of respective degree distributions and clustering coefficients .
applying the same reasoning , we obtain the combined probability @xmath110 as a function of @xmath132 which represents both the initial and secondary contacts .
results are shown in fig .
[ fig2]b for @xmath122 $ ] at fixed @xmath119 and @xmath121 $ ] at fixed @xmath113 ( @xmath106 ) .
squares ( @xmath109 ) mark results for @xmath122 $ ] at fixed @xmath120 and @xmath121 $ ] at fixed @xmath115 . for an argument of the form @xmath133 the least - square fit produces    [ parv ] @xmath134    for @xmath112 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath114 ( @xmath109 ) , respectively .
the prediction error estimate defines the range of values for @xmath135 , where @xmath136 ( for @xmath106 ) and @xmath137 ( for @xmath109 ) .
we obtain the probability @xmath41 for creating a link between different type of nodes both as initial and as secondary contacts to be    [ pard ] @xmath138    the dependence of @xmath41 as a function of @xmath139 is shown in fig .
[ fig2]c for @xmath140 $ ] at fixed @xmath105 ( @xmath106 ) and @xmath108 ( @xmath109 ) .
we applied the linear least - square fit for an argument of the form @xmath141 the prediction error estimate is obtained to be @xmath142 ( for @xmath106 ) and @xmath143 ( for @xmath109 ) .
we use the above parameterization procedures of the probabilities to establish both initial and secondary contacts between @xmath1 nodes @xmath39 , between @xmath0 nodes @xmath110 , and between different types of nodes @xmath41 in obtaining the degree distribution ( eqs .
( [ pn ] ) and ( [ pv ] ) ) and clustering coefficient ( eqs .
( [ ckn ] ) and ( [ ckv ] ) ) for each of the cases considered below .
nodes ( @xmath4 ) @xmath105 and 20% @xmath0 nodes @xmath113 ( @xmath5 ) .
edges are formed with probability @xmath119 if they connect @xmath1 with @xmath1 or @xmath0 with @xmath0 nodes and with probability @xmath144 if they connect @xmath1 with @xmath0 nodes .
symbols represent results from numerical simulations done on a network with @xmath145 agents and averaged over 100 runs .
lines represent the results of degree distribution @xmath102 given by eq .
( [ pn ] ) for @xmath1 nodes ( solid ) and by eq .
( [ pv ] ) for @xmath0 nodes ( dashed ) using functional dependences shown in fig .
[ fig2 ] to obtain functions @xmath146 , @xmath147 , and @xmath148 .
the set of two lines correspond to using @xmath149 or @xmath150 for each of @xmath151 , where @xmath152 .
the dash - dotted line represents analytical distribution @xmath102 obtained using eq .
( [ pns ] ) for @xmath1 nodes .
the dotted line represents analytical distribution @xmath102 obtained using eq .
( [ pvs ] ) for @xmath0 nodes .
( a ) case i : one node as initial contact and two nodes as secondary contacts ; ( b ) case ii : one node as initial contact with probability 0.9 and two nodes as initial contacts with probability 0.1 ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath153 $ ] ; ( c ) case iii : two nodes as initial contacts ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath154$].,title="fig : " ]   nodes ( @xmath4 ) @xmath105 and 20% @xmath0 nodes @xmath113 ( @xmath5 ) .
edges are formed with probability @xmath119 if they connect @xmath1 with @xmath1 or @xmath0 with @xmath0 nodes and with probability @xmath144 if they connect @xmath1 with @xmath0 nodes .
symbols represent results from numerical simulations done on a network with @xmath145 agents and averaged over 100 runs .
lines represent the results of degree distribution @xmath102 given by eq .
( [ pn ] ) for @xmath1 nodes ( solid ) and by eq .
( [ pv ] ) for @xmath0 nodes ( dashed ) using functional dependences shown in fig .
[ fig2 ] to obtain functions @xmath146 , @xmath147 , and @xmath148 .
the set of two lines correspond to using @xmath149 or @xmath150 for each of @xmath151 , where @xmath152 .
the dash - dotted line represents analytical distribution @xmath102 obtained using eq .
( [ pns ] ) for @xmath1 nodes .
the dotted line represents analytical distribution @xmath102 obtained using eq .
( [ pvs ] ) for @xmath0 nodes .
( a ) case i : one node as initial contact and two nodes as secondary contacts ; ( b ) case ii : one node as initial contact with probability 0.9 and two nodes as initial contacts with probability 0.1 ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath153 $ ] ; ( c ) case iii : two nodes as initial contacts ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath154$].,title="fig : " ]   nodes ( @xmath4 ) @xmath105 and 20% @xmath0 nodes @xmath113 ( @xmath5 ) .
edges are formed with probability @xmath119 if they connect @xmath1 with @xmath1 or @xmath0 with @xmath0 nodes and with probability @xmath144 if they connect @xmath1 with @xmath0 nodes .
symbols represent results from numerical simulations done on a network with @xmath145 agents and averaged over 100 runs .
lines represent the results of degree distribution @xmath102 given by eq .
( [ pn ] ) for @xmath1 nodes ( solid ) and by eq .
( [ pv ] ) for @xmath0 nodes ( dashed ) using functional dependences shown in fig .
[ fig2 ] to obtain functions @xmath146 , @xmath147 , and @xmath148 .
the set of two lines correspond to using @xmath149 or @xmath150 for each of @xmath151 , where @xmath152 .
the dash - dotted line represents analytical distribution @xmath102 obtained using eq .
( [ pns ] ) for @xmath1 nodes .
the dotted line represents analytical distribution @xmath102 obtained using eq .
( [ pvs ] ) for @xmath0 nodes . ( a ) case i : one node as initial contact and two nodes as secondary contacts ; ( b ) case ii : one node as initial contact with probability 0.9 and two nodes as initial contacts with probability 0.1 ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath153 $ ] ; ( c ) case iii : two nodes as initial contacts ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath154$].,title="fig : " ]      the analytical distribution @xmath102 is given by eq .
( [ pns ] ) for @xmath1 nodes and by eq .
( [ pvs ] ) for @xmath0 nodes and plotted in fig .
[ fig3 ] with dash - dotted and dotted lines , respectively .
the degree distribution @xmath102 obtained using functional dependences is given by eq .
( [ pn ] ) for @xmath1 nodes and by eq .
( [ pv ] ) for @xmath0 nodes and plotted in fig .
[ fig3 ] with solid and dashed lines , respectively .
simulations are conducted on a network with @xmath145 nodes starting with a seed network of 8 nodes and are averaged over a 100 runs .
all three cases considered are for value of the probability to create an @xmath1 node @xmath105 and for the value of the probability to establish a link between the same type of nodes @xmath119 . to touch upon the versatility of the model we consider three different cases .
they are case i : one node as initial contact @xmath155 and two nodes as secondary contacts @xmath156 ( fig .  [ fig3]a ) ; case ii : one node as initial contact with probability 0.9 and two nodes as initial contacts with probability 0.1 , which gives @xmath157 ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath153 $ ] and therefore , @xmath158 ( fig .  [ fig3]b ) ; case iii : two nodes as initial contacts @xmath159 ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath154 $ ] , @xmath160 ( fig .  [ fig3]c ) .
results demonstrate that for all cases considered the simulations compare relatively well with the analytical derivation of the degree distribution even though using functional dependences in @xmath102 derivation improves the agreement within the limits of the simulations .
nodes ( @xmath4 ) and @xmath0 nodes ( @xmath5 ) for @xmath105 and @xmath119 .
symbols represent results from numerical simulations . lines ( indistinguishable ) represent the results of theoretical derivation of clustering coefficient as a function of the degree of the node using eq .
( [ ckn ] ) for @xmath1 nodes and eq .
( [ ckv ] ) for @xmath0 nodes .
case iii : two nodes as initial contacts ; the number of nodes as secondary contacts is from uniform distribution @xmath154 $ ] . ]
the simulation results for the clustering coefficient as a function of the degree of the node @xmath90 for @xmath1 and @xmath0 nodes for case iii are plotted in fig .
[ fig4 ] with empty and full circles , respectively . the analytical solution for clustering coefficient @xmath90 using eq .
( [ ckn ] ) for @xmath1 nodes and eq .
( [ ckv ] ) for @xmath0 nodes are plotted with lines which coincide with each other . a clear @xmath161 trend is observed which indicates the hierarchy in the system .
the global clustering properties of the network are assessed by the mean clustering coefficient @xmath96 ( eq .  ( [ bc ] ) ) which is averaged over vertex degree , and the transitivity @xmath99 ( eq .  ( [ t ] ) ) .
we study how @xmath96 and @xmath99 change as a function of @xmath12 for a fixed value of @xmath14 ( plotted in fig .
[ fig5]a , c ) and as a function of @xmath14 for a fixed value of @xmath12 ( plotted in fig .
[ fig5]b , d ) .
the mean clustering coefficient @xmath96 for case i ( circles in fig .
[ fig5]a ) has values in the range between 0.41 and 0.43 as a function of @xmath12 for both @xmath1 and @xmath0 nodes for fixed value of @xmath119 . in both case
ii ( squares ) and case iii ( diamonds ) , where the number of secondary contacts is drawn from a uniform distribution , the @xmath162 for @xmath1 and @xmath0 nodes is symmetrical with respect to its value at @xmath108 .
values of @xmath96 for @xmath1 and @xmath0 nodes as a function of @xmath14 ( fig .
[ fig5]b ) demonstrate a tendency to converge for @xmath14 approaching one .    the transitivity @xmath99 ( fig .
[ fig5]c ) as a function of @xmath12 shows a symmetrical pattern for @xmath1 and @xmath0 nodes with respect to its value at @xmath108 similar to @xmath96 behavior but with a wider difference between the results for @xmath1 and @xmath0 nodes and different values . as the probability to establish a link between same type of nodes @xmath14 increases the values of transitivity @xmath99 ( fig .
[ fig5]d ) for @xmath1 and @xmath0 nodes converge .
higher values of both @xmath96 and @xmath99 among the three cases are obtained for case ii when there is an option to create either one or two initial contacts and the number of secondary contacts vary as well , e.g. in @xmath163 $ ] .
( eq .  ( [ bc ] ) ( a ) as a function of the probability to create an @xmath1 node @xmath12 for a fixed value of the probability to create a link between same type of nodes @xmath119 and ( b ) as a function of @xmath14 for a fixed value of @xmath105 for @xmath1 nodes ( empty symbols ) and @xmath0 nodes ( full symbols ) .
( c , d ) same as ( a , b ) but for the values of transitivity @xmath99 ( eq .  ( [ t ] ) .
circles ( @xmath1@xmath4/@xmath0@xmath5 ) represent case i. squares ( @xmath1@xmath109/@xmath0@xmath164 ) represent case ii and diamonds ( @xmath1@xmath165/@xmath0@xmath166 ) mark case iii .
cases i , ii , and iii are as defined in fig . 3.,title="fig : " ]   ( eq .  ( [ bc ] ) ( a ) as a function of the probability to create an @xmath1 node @xmath12 for a fixed value of the probability to create a link between same type of nodes @xmath119 and ( b ) as a function of @xmath14 for a fixed value of @xmath105 for @xmath1 nodes ( empty symbols ) and @xmath0 nodes ( full symbols ) .
( c , d ) same as ( a , b ) but for the values of transitivity @xmath99 ( eq .  ( [ t ] ) .
circles ( @xmath1@xmath4/@xmath0@xmath5 ) represent case i. squares ( @xmath1@xmath109/@xmath0@xmath164 ) represent case ii and diamonds ( @xmath1@xmath165/@xmath0@xmath166 ) mark case iii .
cases i , ii , and iii are as defined in fig . 3.,title="fig : " ]   ( eq .  ( [ bc ] ) ( a ) as a function of the probability to create an @xmath1 node @xmath12 for a fixed value of the probability to create a link between same type of nodes @xmath119 and ( b ) as a function of @xmath14 for a fixed value of @xmath105 for @xmath1 nodes ( empty symbols ) and @xmath0 nodes ( full symbols ) .
( c , d ) same as ( a , b ) but for the values of transitivity @xmath99 ( eq .  ( [ t ] ) .
circles ( @xmath1@xmath4/@xmath0@xmath5 ) represent case i. squares ( @xmath1@xmath109/@xmath0@xmath164 ) represent case ii and diamonds ( @xmath1@xmath165/@xmath0@xmath166 ) mark case iii .
cases i , ii , and iii are as defined in fig . 3.,title="fig : " ]   ( eq .  ( [ bc ] ) ( a ) as a function of the probability to create an @xmath1 node @xmath12 for a fixed value of the probability to create a link between same type of nodes @xmath119 and ( b ) as a function of @xmath14 for a fixed value of @xmath105 for @xmath1 nodes ( empty symbols ) and @xmath0 nodes ( full symbols ) .
( c , d ) same as ( a , b ) but for the values of transitivity @xmath99 ( eq .
( [ t ] ) . circles ( @xmath1@xmath4/@xmath0@xmath5 ) represent case i. squares ( @xmath1@xmath109/@xmath0@xmath164 ) represent case ii and diamonds ( @xmath1@xmath165/@xmath0@xmath166 ) mark case iii .
cases i , ii , and iii are as defined in fig . 3.,title="fig : " ]     as a function of the probability to create a link between same type of nodes @xmath14 for a fixed value of @xmath105 of ( a ) @xmath6 network ; ( b ) @xmath7 network ; ( c ) @xmath8 network .
circles ( @xmath5 ) represent case i. squares ( @xmath164 ) represent case ii and diamonds ( @xmath166 ) mark case iii .
cases i , ii , and iii are as defined in fig . 3.,title="fig : " ]   as a function of the probability to create a link between same type of nodes @xmath14 for a fixed value of @xmath105 of ( a ) @xmath6 network ; ( b ) @xmath7 network ; ( c ) @xmath8 network .
circles ( @xmath5 ) represent case i. squares ( @xmath164 ) represent case ii and diamonds ( @xmath166 ) mark case iii .
cases i , ii , and iii are as defined in fig . 3.,title="fig : " ]   as a function of the probability to create a link between same type of nodes @xmath14 for a fixed value of @xmath105 of ( a ) @xmath6 network ; ( b ) @xmath7 network ; ( c ) @xmath8 network .
circles ( @xmath5 ) represent case i. squares ( @xmath164 ) represent case ii and diamonds ( @xmath166 ) mark case iii .
cases i , ii , and iii are as defined in fig . 3.,title="fig : " ]      the assortative properties of the network describe the degree correlation of the nodes at the ends of an edge and are quantified by the pearson correlation coefficient @xmath167 .
the network is said to be assortative when high degree nodes tend to connect to other high - degree nodes and @xmath168 $ ] @xcite .
the network is characterized by disassortative mixing when high degree nodes tend to connect to low degree nodes and @xmath169 .
we calculate @xmath167 of each of @xmath6 , @xmath7 , and @xmath8 networks obtained for a fixed value of @xmath105 and plot the @xmath167-dependence as a function of @xmath14 in fig .
[ fig6]a - c for the three cases considered .
@xmath6 and @xmath8 networks of case i ( @xmath5 ) show slight disassortative mixing owing to the two initial contacts and one secondary contact . increasing the probability @xmath14 to create an edge between the same type of nodes for case i ( @xmath5 in fig .
[ fig6]b ) results in changing from disassortative for @xmath170 to slightly assortative for @xmath171 . varying the number of initial and secondary contacts in case ii ( @xmath164 ) and iii ( @xmath166 ) produces assortatively mixed @xmath6 and @xmath7 networks ( fig .
[ fig6]a , b ) .
the assortativity coefficient @xmath172 of the @xmath7 networks ( @xmath164 and @xmath166 in fig .
[ fig6]b ) increases linearly with increasing the probability to create a link between the same type of nodes reaching a plateau around @xmath173 and then decreasing for @xmath174 probably because all available nodes are already connected .
the values of @xmath172 are larger versus @xmath175 because of the smaller number ( @xmath176 ) of @xmath0 nodes available for contacts .
a recent visualization of the connections in a terrorist network such as the global salafi jihad depicts them to form an assortative network @xcite .
for all three cases the @xmath8 networks ( fig .
[ fig6]c ) show disassortative mixing of their degree only except for very high values of @xmath177 and @xmath178 for case iii ( @xmath166 ) .
a recent empirical study of an online social system reports that relationships driven by aggression lead to markedly different systemic characteristics than relations of a non - aggressive nature @xcite .
assortativity is a characteristic of global properties of the system . in agreement with the empirical findings the assortativity of @xmath8 network ( fig .
[ fig6]c ) produced by our model which represents relationships driven by aggression is clearly different from the assortativity of @xmath6 and @xmath7 networks ( fig .
[ fig6]a , b ) which are driven by non - aggressive relationships .
we introduced a model intended to characterize the interactions between two distinct populations , which form links more easily within their group than between groups .
we aim to describe the interactions of potentially violent terrorist groups within the context of a largely non - violent population , although the same model could , in principle , be applied to other non - mainstream social groups .
the model is kept simple enough so that analytical solutions could be derived and compared with empirical parameterizations and numerical simulation results .
the model produces networks with relatively high mean clustering coefficient @xmath96 and transitivity @xmath99 .
their values vary with the balance between the initial and secondary contacts .
this is expected because of the interplay between the random and preferential attachments of the initial and secondary connections , respectively .
the assortativity pattern of modeled networks show that the potentially violent @xmath7 network qualitatively resembles the connectivity pattern in terrorist networks reported in @xcite .
the assortativity behavior of @xmath8 network which is driven by aggression is clearly different than the assortativity pattern of @xmath6 and @xmath7 networks which are non - aggressive relationships ; a finding which is in agreement with the results of recent empirical study of an online social system @xcite .