The Degree Ratio Ranking Method for Directed Networks

R. van den Brink, A. Rusinowska
{"title":"The Degree Ratio Ranking Method for Directed Networks","authors":"R. van den Brink, A. Rusinowska","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3367529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the most famous ranking methods for digraphs is the ranking by Copeland score. The Copeland score of a node in a digraph is the difference between its outdegree (i.e. its number of outgoing arcs) and its indegree (i.e. its number of ingoing arcs). In the ranking by Copeland score, a node is ranked higher, the higher is its Copeland score. In this paper, we deal with an alternative to rank nodes according to their out– and indegree, namely ranking the nodes according to their degree ratio, i.e. the outdegree divided by the indegree. To avoid dividing by a zero indegree, we implicitly take the out– and indegree of the reflexive digraph. We provide an axiomatization of the ranking by degree ratio using a sibling neutrality axiom, which says that the entrance of a sibling (i.e. a node that is in some sense similar to the original node) does not change the ranking among the original nodes. We also provide a new axiomatization of the ranking by Copeland score using the same axioms except that this method satisfies a different sibling neutrality. Finally, we modify the ranking by degree ratio by not considering the reflexive digraph, but by definition assume nodes with indegree zero to be ranked higher than nodes with a positive indegree. We provide an axiomatization of this ranking by modified degree ratio using yet another sibling neutrality and a maximal property. In this way, we can compare the three ranking methods by their respective sibling neutrality.","PeriodicalId":365118,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making (Topic)","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3367529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One of the most famous ranking methods for digraphs is the ranking by Copeland score. The Copeland score of a node in a digraph is the difference between its outdegree (i.e. its number of outgoing arcs) and its indegree (i.e. its number of ingoing arcs). In the ranking by Copeland score, a node is ranked higher, the higher is its Copeland score. In this paper, we deal with an alternative to rank nodes according to their out– and indegree, namely ranking the nodes according to their degree ratio, i.e. the outdegree divided by the indegree. To avoid dividing by a zero indegree, we implicitly take the out– and indegree of the reflexive digraph. We provide an axiomatization of the ranking by degree ratio using a sibling neutrality axiom, which says that the entrance of a sibling (i.e. a node that is in some sense similar to the original node) does not change the ranking among the original nodes. We also provide a new axiomatization of the ranking by Copeland score using the same axioms except that this method satisfies a different sibling neutrality. Finally, we modify the ranking by degree ratio by not considering the reflexive digraph, but by definition assume nodes with indegree zero to be ranked higher than nodes with a positive indegree. We provide an axiomatization of this ranking by modified degree ratio using yet another sibling neutrality and a maximal property. In this way, we can compare the three ranking methods by their respective sibling neutrality.
有向网络的度比排序方法
有向图最著名的排名方法之一是Copeland分数排名。有向图中节点的Copeland分数是它的出度(即出弧的数量)和进度(即进弧的数量)之差。在Copeland评分排序中,节点的排名越高,其Copeland评分越高。在本文中,我们处理了一种根据出度和度对节点进行排序的替代方案,即根据节点的度比(即出度除以度)对节点进行排序。为了避免除以零度,我们隐式地取自反有向图的出界和度数。我们使用兄弟中立公理提供了一个根据度比排序的公理化,即兄弟节点(即在某种意义上与原始节点相似的节点)的进入不会改变原始节点之间的排名。我们还使用相同的公理提供了一个新的Copeland分数排名公理化,除了这个方法满足不同的兄弟中立性。最后,我们不考虑自反有向图,而是根据定义假设度为零的节点比度为正的节点排名高。我们使用另一个兄弟中立性和极大性,通过修改度比提供了这个排名的公理化。通过这种方式,我们可以通过各自的兄弟中立性来比较这三种排名方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信