- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review E

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Limits of the memory coefficient in measuring correlated bursts

Hang-Hyun Jo1,2,3,* and Takayuki Hiraoka1,†

  • 1Asia Pacific Center for Theoretical Physics, Pohang 37673, Republic of Korea
  • 2Department of Physics, Pohang University of Science and Technology, Pohang 37673, Republic of Korea
  • 3Department of Computer Science, Aalto University, Espoo FI-00076, Finland

  • *hang-hyun.jo@apctp.org
  • †takayuki.hiraoka@apctp.org
PDF

Phys. Rev. E 97, 032121 – Published 16 March, 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.97.032121

Abstract

Temporal inhomogeneities in event sequences of natural and social phenomena have been characterized in terms of interevent times and correlations between interevent times. The inhomogeneities of interevent times have been extensively studied, while the correlations between interevent times, often called correlated bursts, are far from being fully understood. For measuring the correlated bursts, two relevant approaches were suggested, i.e., memory coefficient and burst size distribution. Here a burst size denotes the number of events in a bursty train detected for a given time window. Empirical analyses have revealed that the larger memory coefficient tends to be associated with the heavier tail of the burst size distribution. In particular, empirical findings in human activities appear inconsistent, such that the memory coefficient is close to 0, while burst size distributions follow a power law. In order to comprehend these observations, by assuming the conditional independence between consecutive interevent times, we derive the analytical form of the memory coefficient as a function of parameters describing interevent time and burst size distributions. Our analytical result can explain the general tendency of the larger memory coefficient being associated with the heavier tail of burst size distribution. We also find that the apparently inconsistent observations in human activities are compatible with each other, indicating that the memory coefficient has limits to measure the correlated bursts.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (29)

  1. M. S. Wheatland, P. A. Sturrock, and J. M. McTiernan, Astrophys. J. 509, 448 (1998).
  2. A. Corral, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 108501 (2004).
  3. L. de Arcangelis, C. Godano, E. Lippiello, and M. Nicodemi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 051102 (2006).
  4. E. Lippiello, C. Godano, and L. de Arcangelis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 098501 (2007).
  5. L. de Arcangelis, C. Godano, J. R. Grasso, and E. Lippiello, Phys. Rep. 628, 1 (2016).
  6. T. Kemuriyama, H. Ohta, Y. Sato, S. Maruyama, M. Tandai-Hiruma, K. Kato, and Y. Nishida, BioSystems 101, 144 (2010).
  7. A.-L. Barabási, Nature (London) 435, 207 (2005).
  8. M. Karsai, H.-H. Jo, and K. Kaski, Bursty Human Dynamics (Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, Switzerland, 2018).
  9. P. Bak, C. Tang, and K. Wiesenfeld, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 381 (1987).
  10. M. B. Weissman, Rev. Mod. Phys. 60, 537 (1988).
  11. L. Ward and P. Greenwood, Scholarpedia 2, 1537 (2007).
  12. A. Vazquez, B. Rácz, A. Lukács, and A. L. Barabási, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 158702 (2007).
  13. M. Karsai, M. Kivelä, R. K. Pan, K. Kaski, J. Kertész, A.-L. Barabási, and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rev. E 83, 025102 (2011).
  14. G. Miritello, E. Moro, and R. Lara, Phys. Rev. E 83, 045102 (2011).
  15. L. E. C. Rocha, F. Liljeros, and P. Holme, PLoS Comput. Biol. 7, e1001109 (2011).
  16. H.-H. Jo, J. I. Perotti, K. Kaski, and J. Kertész, Phys. Rev. X 4, 011041 (2014).
  17. J.-C. Delvenne, R. Lambiotte, and L. E. C. Rocha, Nat. Commun. 6, 7366 (2015).
  18. M. Karsai, K. Kaski, A.-L. Barabási, and J. Kertész, Sci. Rep. 2, 397 (2012).
  19. M. Karsai, K. Kaski, and J. Kertész, PLoS ONE 7, e40612 (2012).
  20. H.-H. Jo, J. I. Perotti, K. Kaski, and J. Kertész, Phys. Rev. E 92, 022814 (2015).
  21. H.-H. Jo, Phys. Rev. E 96, 062131 (2017).
  22. K.-I. Goh and A.-L. Barabási, Europhys. Lett. 81, 48002 (2008).
  23. W. Wang, N. Yuan, L. Pan, P. Jiao, W. Dai, G. Xue, and D. Liu, Physica A 436, 846 (2015).
  24. L. Böttcher, O. Woolley-Meza, and D. Brockmann, PLoS ONE 12, e0178062 (2017).
  25. We also note that the exponential burst size distributions have been reported for mobile phone calls of individual users in another work [28]. These inconsistent results for burst size distributions raise a debatable issue about the existence of the hierarchical burst structure in human communication patterns. This, however, is beyond the scope of this paper.
  26. Although the power-law tails of burst size distributions have been shown to be robust with respect to the variation of Δt in several empirical analyses, the value of Δt might be related to a specific time scale in some phenomena. In such cases, a more realistic approach should be taken so that both β and Δt are control parameters, hence one can study the effect of β on M without bothering with the choice of Δt.
  27. For the generation of the power-law distribution of discrete values, we referred to the method in Ref. [29].
  28. Z.-Q. Jiang, W.-J. Xie, M.-X. Li, W.-X. Zhou, and D. Sornette, J. Stat. Mech. (2016) 073210.
  29. A. Clauset, C. R. Shalizi, and M. E. J. Newman, SIAM Rev. 51, 661 (2009).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. E 97, 032121– Published 16 March, 2018
  • Received 2 January 2018
  • Revised 2 March 2018
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2018 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation