pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.02537 · v1 · pith:YPWLCHZKnew · submitted 2026-06-01 · ⚛️ physics.soc-ph · cs.SI

A Guide to Higher-Order Homophily

Moritz Laber , Brennan Klein This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 11:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.soc-ph cs.SI
keywords homophilyheterophilyhypergraphssocial networksmixing patternshigher-order interactionsnetwork measuresgenerative models
0
0 comments X

The pith

Hypergraphs require distinct measures and models to quantify homophily in group interactions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper surveys measures for quantifying homophily and heterophily in hypergraphs, emphasizing how they differ conceptually from traditional pairwise measures and providing in-depth examples for each. It also reviews hypergraph models for higher-order mixing patterns and groups them into families with distinct use cases. This synthesis aims to help researchers make informed choices when social systems are modeled as hypergraphs. A sympathetic reader would care because hypergraphs better capture multi-way group interactions common in social data, so accurate assessment of similarity-driven mixing requires tools beyond simple network approaches.

Core claim

The paper establishes that homophily and heterophily in hypergraphs can be quantified with measures adapted to higher-order structures and that generative models fall into several families suited to different modeling needs, thereby synthesizing existing methods to support better methodological decisions and future work on mixing patterns in hypergraph representations of social systems.

What carries the argument

The survey of hypergraph-specific homophily measures that account for multi-way interactions and the classification of hypergraph models into families based on their handling of higher-order mixing patterns.

If this is right

  • Researchers gain concrete examples to select measures that capture conceptual differences from pairwise networks.
  • Model families can be matched to specific use cases when generating synthetic hypergraphs with controlled mixing patterns.
  • The overview supports consistent application of methods across studies of higher-order social structures.
  • Future extensions can build directly on the distinguished categories of measures and models.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The guide could serve as a starting point for creating benchmark datasets that test the surveyed measures against one another on real hypergraphs.
  • Methods from this synthesis might apply to non-social domains such as biological or technological systems where group interactions appear.
  • Combining these measures with dynamic hypergraph models could address how mixing patterns evolve over time.
  • Empirical validation on diverse datasets would help identify which model families best fit observed higher-order homophily.

Load-bearing premise

Hypergraphs are increasingly used to represent social systems, so higher-order views of homophily become necessary and the surveyed measures and models form the appropriate basis for choices.

What would settle it

A large-scale empirical study of social hypergraphs showing that standard pairwise homophily measures produce equivalent results to the higher-order ones in most cases would challenge the premise that new tools are required.

read the original abstract

Homophily, the overrepresentation of interactions among similar individuals, and heterophily, the elevated prevalence of interactions among dissimilar ones, are frequently observed mixing patterns in social networks. As hypergraphs are increasingly used to represent social systems, a higher-order perspective on homophily and heterophily becomes ever more relevant. Here, we provide two complementary perspectives on this problem: First, we survey measures that can be used to quantify homophily (or heterophily) in hypergraphs -- emphasizing conceptual differences to existing pairwise measures -- and explain each measure through in-depth examples. Second, we provide an overview of hypergraph models for higher-order mixing patterns, distinguishing several model families with distinct use cases. By providing a guide to existing methods and synthesizing the current body of knowledge on higher-order homophily and heterophily, we lay the basis for informed methodological choices and future developments.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript surveys measures for quantifying homophily and heterophily in hypergraphs (emphasizing differences from pairwise network measures and illustrating each via examples) and provides an overview of hypergraph models for higher-order mixing patterns, organized into distinct model families with their use cases. The central claim is that this synthesis supplies a practical foundation for methodological choices and future research as hypergraphs become more common in social systems modeling.

Significance. If the coverage is accurate and reasonably complete, the guide could serve as a useful reference for researchers adopting hypergraph representations, by clarifying conceptual distinctions and cataloging available tools in one place.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the title refers only to homophily while the abstract and claimed scope explicitly include heterophily; a brief parenthetical in the title or a clarifying sentence would avoid reader confusion.
  2. The manuscript should include an explicit statement of search strategy, inclusion criteria, and time window for the surveyed literature so readers can assess completeness.
  3. When presenting multiple measures, a summary table comparing their definitions, computational complexity, and sensitivity to hyperedge size would improve usability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their summary of the manuscript, their assessment of its potential significance as a reference, and the recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were provided in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: review paper with no derivations or predictions

full rationale

This manuscript is explicitly a literature survey and guide to existing measures and models of higher-order homophily/heterophily in hypergraphs. It presents no new equations, no fitted parameters, no predictions, and no derivation chain. The central claim is that synthesizing prior work provides a useful foundation for methodological choices; this rests on coverage and clarification rather than any self-referential reduction. No self-citations function as load-bearing uniqueness theorems, and no ansatzes or renamings are introduced as novel results. The paper is self-contained against external benchmarks as a review.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a survey paper. It introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; it reviews measures and models from prior work.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5674 in / 1132 out tokens · 29725 ms · 2026-06-28T11:38:20.394790+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

125 extracted references · 111 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    McPherson, L

    M. McPherson, L. Smith-Lovin, J.M. Cook, Annual Review of Sociology27, 415 (2001). doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415 2001

  2. [2]

    Bojanowski, R

    M. Bojanowski, R. Corten, Social Networks39, 14 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2014.04.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2014.04.001 2014

  3. [3]

    Lawrence, N.P

    B.S. Lawrence, N.P. Shah, Academy of Management Annals14(2), 513 (2020). doi:10.5465/annals.2018.0147

    work page doi:10.5465/annals.2018.0147 2020

  4. [4]

    Newman, Physical Review E67(2), 026126 (2003)

    M.E.J. Newman, Physical Review E67(2), 026126 (2003). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.67.026126

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.67.026126 2003

  5. [5]

    Freeman, Connections19(1), 39 (1996)

    L.C. Freeman, Connections19(1), 39 (1996)

    1996

  6. [6]

    Rivera, S.B

    M.T. Rivera, S.B. Soderstrom, B. Uzzi, Annual Review of Sociology36, 91 (2010). doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134743

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134743 2010

  7. [7]

    Peixoto, Physical Review X12(1), 011004 (2022)

    T.P. Peixoto, Physical Review X12(1), 011004 (2022). doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.12.011004

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.12.011004 2022

  8. [8]

    Ertug, J

    G. Ertug, J. Brennecke, B. Kovács, T. Zou, Academy of Management Annals 16(1), 38 (2022). doi:10.5465/annals.2020.0230

    work page doi:10.5465/annals.2020.0230 2022

  9. [9]

    Battiston, V

    F. Battiston, V. Capraro, F. Karimi, S. Lehmann, A.B. Migliano, O. Sadekar, A. Sánchez, M. Perc, Nature Human Behaviour9(12), 2441 (2025). doi:10.1038/s41562-025-02373-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41562-025-02373-5 2025

  10. [10]

    Defining and classifying models of groups: The social ontology of higher-order networks

    J. St-Onge, R. Harp, G. Burgio, T.M. Waring, J. Lovato, L. Hébert-Dufresne. Defining and classifying models of groups: The social ontology of higher-order networks (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2507.02758

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.02758 2025

  11. [11]

    Kamiński, P

    B. Kamiński, P. Misiorek, P. Prałat, F. Théberge, Journal of Complex Networks 12(5), cnae041 (2024). doi:10.1093/comnet/cnae041

    work page doi:10.1093/comnet/cnae041 2024

  12. [12]

    Veldt, A.R

    N. Veldt, A.R. Benson, J. Kleinberg, Science Advances9(1), eabq3200 (2023). doi:10.1126/sciadv.abq3200 A Guide to Higher-Order Homophily 39

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.abq3200 2023

  13. [13]

    Saxena, G

    A. Saxena, G. Kumar, C. Meena. Homophily in Complex Networks: Measures, Models, and Applications (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2509.18289

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.18289 2025

  14. [14]

    Cimini, T

    G. Cimini, T. Squartini, F. Saracco, D. Garlaschelli, A. Gabrielli, G. Caldarelli, Nature Reviews Physics1(1), 58 (2019). doi:10.1038/s42254-018-0002-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-018-0002-6 2019

  15. [15]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.14.031032

    G.Preti,A.Fazzone,G.Petri,G.DeFrancisciMorales,PhysicalReviewX14(3), 031032 (2024). doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.14.031032

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.14.031032 2024

  16. [16]

    Crane,Probabilistic Foundations of Statistical Network Analysis, 1st edn

    H. Crane,Probabilistic Foundations of Statistical Network Analysis, 1st edn. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018).https://www.routledge.com/ Probabilistic-Foundations-of-Statistical-Network-Analysis/ Crane/p/book/9781138630154

    arXiv 2018

  17. [17]

    Peel, T.P

    L. Peel, T.P. Peixoto, M. De Domenico, Nature Communications13(1), 6794 (2022). doi:10.1038/s41467-022-34267-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-022-34267-9 2022

  18. [18]

    Giroire, N

    F. Giroire, N. Nisse, T. Trolliet, M. Sulkowska, Network Science10(4), 400 (2022). doi:10.1017/nws.2022.35

    work page doi:10.1017/nws.2022.35 2022

  19. [19]

    Laber, S

    M. Laber, S. Dies, J. Ehlert, B. Klein, T. Eliassi-Rad, Communications Physics 9(1), 13 (2025). doi:10.1038/s42005-025-02445-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-025-02445-y 2025

  20. [20]

    Coleman, Human Organization17(4), 28 (1958)

    J.S. Coleman, Human Organization17(4), 28 (1958). doi:10.17730/humo.17.4.q5604m676260q8n7

    work page doi:10.17730/humo.17.4.q5604m676260q8n7 1958

  21. [21]

    Currarini, M.O

    S. Currarini, M.O. Jackson, P. Pin, Econometrica77(4), 1003 (2009). doi:10.3982/ECTA7528

    work page doi:10.3982/ecta7528 2009

  22. [22]

    Altenburger, J

    K.M. Altenburger, J. Ugander, Nature Human Behaviour2(4), 284 (2018). doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0321-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0321-8 2018

  23. [23]

    Kumar, A

    G. Kumar, A. Saxena, C. Meena. Perplexity-Homophily Index: Homophily through Diversity in Hypergraphs (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2511.19170

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.19170 2025

  24. [24]

    Hill, Ecology54(2), 427 (1973)

    M.O. Hill, Ecology54(2), 427 (1973). doi:10.2307/1934352

    work page doi:10.2307/1934352 1973

  25. [25]

    T.M.Cover,J.A.Thomas,ElementsofInformationTheory,2ndedn.(JohnWiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006)

    2006

  26. [26]

    Hyper- graph Contrastive Learning for both Homophilic and Heterophilic Hypergraphs (2025)

    R.Guan,X.Li,Y.Zhang,W.Pang,F.Giunchiglia,X.Li,Y.Liu,X.Feng. Hyper- graph Contrastive Learning for both Homophilic and Heterophilic Hypergraphs (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2511.18783

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.18783 2025

  27. [27]

    Fog, Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation37(2), 258 (2008)

    A. Fog, Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation37(2), 258 (2008). doi:10.1080/03610910701790269

    work page doi:10.1080/03610910701790269 2008

  28. [28]

    Novice type error diagnosis with natural language models

    A. Sarker, N. Northrup, A. Jadbabaie, inComplex Networks and Their Applica- tions XI, ed. by H. Cherifi, R.N. Mantegna, L.M. Rocha, C. Cherifi, S. Micciche (SpringerInternationalPublishing,2023),pp.311–323. doi:10.1007/978-3-031- 21131-7_24

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031- 2023

  29. [29]

    Sarker, N

    A. Sarker, N. Northrup, A. Jadbabaie, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences121(12), e2315931121 (2024). doi:10.1073/pnas.2315931121

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2315931121 2024

  30. [30]

    Majhi, M

    S. Majhi, M. Perc, D. Ghosh, Journal of The Royal Society Interface19(188), 20220043 (2022). doi:10.1098/rsif.2022.0043

    work page doi:10.1098/rsif.2022.0043 2022

  31. [31]

    Battiston, C

    F. Battiston, C. Bick, M. Lucas, A.P. Millán, P.S. Skardal, Y. Zhang, Nature Reviews Physics8(3), 146 (2026). doi:10.1038/s42254-025-00916-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-025-00916-3 2026

  32. [32]

    Telyatnikov, M.S

    L. Telyatnikov, M.S. Bucarelli, G. Bernardez, O. Zaghen, S. Scardapane, P. Lio, Transactions on Machine Learning Research (2024).https://openreview. net/forum?id=8rxtL0kZnX 40 Moritz Laber and Brennan Klein

    2024

  33. [33]

    J. Chun, S. Yoon, M. Choe, G. Lee, K. Shin, in2025 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Data Mining (ICDM)(IEEE, 2025), pp. 189–198. doi:10.1109/ICDM65498.2025.00026

    work page doi:10.1109/icdm65498.2025.00026 2025

  34. [34]

    M. Li, Y. Gu, Y. Wang, Y. Fang, L. Bai, X. Zhuang, P. Liò, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence39(17), 18377 (2025). doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i17.34022

    work page doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i17.34022 2025

  35. [35]

    Failla, G

    A. Failla, G. Rossetti, F. Cauteruccio, inSocial Networks Analysis and Min- ing, ed. by L.M. Aiello, T. Chakraborty, S. Gaito (Springer, 2025), pp. 40–55. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-78541-2_3

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-78541-2_3 2025

  36. [36]

    doi:10.1093/comnet/cnx001

    S.G.Aksoy,T.G.Kolda,A.Pinar,JournalofComplexNetworks5(4),581(2017). doi:10.1093/comnet/cnx001

    work page doi:10.1093/comnet/cnx001 2017

  37. [37]

    D. Zhou, J. Huang, B. Schölkopf, inAdvances in Neural In- formation Processing Systems, vol. 19 (MIT Press, 2006), vol. 19.https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2006/hash/ dff8e9c2ac33381546d96deea9922999-Abstract.html

    2006

  38. [38]

    Chitra, B

    U. Chitra, B. Raphael, inProceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning(PMLR, 2019), pp. 1172–1181.https://proceedings. mlr.press/v97/chitra19a.html

    2019

  39. [39]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.101.022308

    T.Carletti,F.Battiston,G.Cencetti,D.Fanelli,PhysicalReviewE101(2),022308 (2020). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.101.022308

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.101.022308 2020

  40. [40]

    Chodrow, Journal of Complex Networks8(3), cnaa018 (2020)

    P.S. Chodrow, Journal of Complex Networks8(3), cnaa018 (2020). doi:10.1093/comnet/cnaa018

    work page doi:10.1093/comnet/cnaa018 2020

  41. [41]

    Landry, J.G

    N.W. Landry, J.G. Restrepo, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science32(5), 053113 (2022). doi:10.1063/5.0086905

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0086905 2022

  42. [42]

    Chodrow, A

    P. Chodrow, A. Mellor, Applied Network Science5(1), 9 (2020). doi:10.1007/s41109-020-0252-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s41109-020-0252-y 2020

  43. [43]

    Karimi, M

    F. Karimi, M. Oliveira, Scientific Reports13(1), 21053 (2023). doi:10.1038/s41598-023-48113-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-023-48113-5 2023

  44. [44]

    Litvak, R

    N. Litvak, R. van der Hofstad, Physical Review E87(2), 022801 (2013). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.87.022801

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.87.022801 2013

  45. [45]

    Cinelli, L

    M. Cinelli, L. Peel, A. Iovanella, J.C. Delvenne, Physical Review E102(6), 062310 (2020). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.102.062310

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.102.062310 2020

  46. [46]

    Newman, M

    M.E.J. Newman, M. Girvan, Physical Review E69(2), 026113 (2004). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.69.026113

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.69.026113 2004

  47. [47]

    Fortunato, Physics Reports486(3), 75 (2010)

    S. Fortunato, Physics Reports486(3), 75 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002 2010

  48. [48]

    doi:10.1145/3091106

    T.Chakraborty,A.Dalmia,A.Mukherjee,N.Ganguly,ACMComputingSurveys (CSUR)50(4), 54:1 (2017). doi:10.1145/3091106

    work page doi:10.1145/3091106 2017

  49. [49]

    Peixoto,Descriptive vs

    T.P. Peixoto,Descriptive vs. Inferential Community Detection in Networks: Pit- falls, Myths and Half-Truths(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2023). doi:10.1017/9781009118897

    work page doi:10.1017/9781009118897 2023

  50. [50]

    Kamiński, V

    B. Kamiński, V. Poulin, P. Prałat, P. Szufel, F. Théberge, PLOS ONE14(11), e0224307 (2019). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0224307

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0224307 2019

  51. [51]

    doi:10.1126/sciadv.abh1303 A Guide to Higher-Order Homophily 41

    P.S.Chodrow,N.Veldt,A.R.Benson,ScienceAdvances7(28),eabh1303(2021). doi:10.1126/sciadv.abh1303 A Guide to Higher-Order Homophily 41

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.abh1303 2021

  52. [52]

    Fortunato, M

    S. Fortunato, M. Barthélemy, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104(1), 36 (2007). doi:10.1073/pnas.0605965104

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.0605965104 2007

  53. [53]

    P.Wang,S.Yang,Y.Liu,Z.Wang,P.Li,inTheEleventhInternationalConference onLearningRepresentations(2022).https://openreview.net/forum?id= RiTjKoscnNd

    2022

  54. [54]

    doi:10.1038/s41562-019-0677-4

    E.Lee,F.Karimi,C.Wagner,H.H.Jo,M.Strohmaier,M.Galesic,NatureHuman Behaviour3(10), 1078 (2019). doi:10.1038/s41562-019-0677-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41562-019-0677-4 2019

  55. [55]

    Karimi, M

    F. Karimi, M. Génois, C. Wagner, P. Singer, M. Strohmaier, Scientific Reports 8(1), 11077 (2018). doi:10.1038/s41598-018-29405-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-018-29405-7 2018

  56. [56]

    E. Lee, J. Kang, Journal of the Korean Physical Society84(6), 470 (2024). doi:10.1007/s40042-024-01013-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s40042-024-01013-x 2024

  57. [57]

    Jaynes, Proceedings of the IEEE70(9), 939 (1982)

    E. Jaynes, Proceedings of the IEEE70(9), 939 (1982). doi:10.1109/PROC.1982.12425

    work page doi:10.1109/proc.1982.12425 1982

  58. [58]

    Park, M.E.J

    J. Park, M.E.J. Newman, Physical Review E70(6), 066117 (2004). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.70.066117

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.70.066117 2004

  59. [59]

    Gilbert, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics30(4), 1141 (1959)

    E.N. Gilbert, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics30(4), 1141 (1959)

    1959

  60. [60]

    Erdös, A

    P. Erdös, A. Rényi, inThe Structure and Dynamics of Networks (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 2011), pp. 38–82. doi:10.1515/9781400841356.38

    work page doi:10.1515/9781400841356.38 2011

  61. [61]

    Schmidt-Pruzan, E

    J. Schmidt-Pruzan, E. Shamir, Combinatorica5(1), 81 (1985). doi:10.1007/BF02579445

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02579445 1985

  62. [62]

    Saracco, G

    F. Saracco, G. Petri, R. Lambiotte, T. Squartini, Communications Physics8(1), 284 (2025). doi:10.1038/s42005-025-02182-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-025-02182-2 2025

  63. [63]

    G. Lee, F. Bu, T. Eliassi-Rad, K. Shin, ACM Comput. Surv. (2025). doi:10.1145/3719002

    work page doi:10.1145/3719002 2025

  64. [64]

    M.T. Do, S.e. Yoon, B. Hooi, K. Shin, inProceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Min- ing(Association for Computing Machinery, 2020), KDD ’20, pp. 176–186. doi:10.1145/3394486.3403060

    work page doi:10.1145/3394486.3403060 2020

  65. [65]

    doi:10.1073/pnas.252631999

    F.Chung,L.Lu,ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences99(25),15879 (2002). doi:10.1073/pnas.252631999

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.252631999 2002

  66. [66]

    Molloy, B

    M. Molloy, B. Reed, Random Structures & Algorithms6(2-3), 161 (1995). doi:10.1002/rsa.3240060204

    work page doi:10.1002/rsa.3240060204 1995

  67. [67]

    Fosdick, D.B

    B.K. Fosdick, D.B. Larremore, J. Nishimura, J. Ugander, SIAM Review60(2), 315 (2018). doi:10.1137/16M1087175

    work page doi:10.1137/16m1087175 2018

  68. [68]

    493–600.https://www.proceedings.com/24332.html

    D.Stasi,K.Sadeghi,A.Rinaldo,S.Petrović,S.E.Fienberg,inProceedingsofthe 21st International Conference on Computational Statistics(Curran Associates, Inc., 2014), pp. 493–600.https://www.proceedings.com/24332.html

    2014

  69. [69]

    Saracco, R

    F. Saracco, R. Di Clemente, A. Gabrielli, T. Squartini, Scientific Reports5(1), 10595 (2015). doi:10.1038/srep10595

    work page doi:10.1038/srep10595 2015

  70. [70]

    M.Abuissa,M.Riondato,inProceedingsofthe32ndACMSIGKDDConference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining V.1(Association for Computing Machinery, 2026), KDD ’26, pp. 1–12. doi:10.1145/3770854.3780254

    work page doi:10.1145/3770854.3780254 2026

  71. [71]

    Kraakman, C

    Y.J. Kraakman, C. Stegehuis, Journal of Complex Networks13(4), cnaf007 (2025). doi:10.1093/comnet/cnaf007 42 Moritz Laber and Brennan Klein

    work page doi:10.1093/comnet/cnaf007 2025

  72. [72]

    Kraakman, C

    Y.J. Kraakman, C. Stegehuis, Discrete Mathematics349(6), 114961 (2026). doi:10.1016/j.disc.2025.114961

    work page doi:10.1016/j.disc.2025.114961 2026

  73. [73]

    Preti, M

    G. Preti, M. Riondato, A. Gionis, G. De Francisci Morales, inProceedings of the Eighteenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Min- ing(Association for Computing Machinery, 2025), WSDM ’25, pp. 30–39. doi:10.1145/3701551.3703560

    work page doi:10.1145/3701551.3703560 2025

  74. [74]

    Sampling Random Graphs from the Colored Configuration Model

    L.Pellegrina. SamplingRandomGraphsfromtheColoredConfigurationModel (2026). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2605.28772

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.28772 2026

  75. [75]

    Mahadevan, D

    P. Mahadevan, D. Krioukov, K. Fall, A. Vahdat, ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review36(4), 135 (2006). doi:10.1145/1151659.1159930

    work page doi:10.1145/1151659.1159930 2006

  76. [76]

    Orsini, M.M

    C. Orsini, M.M. Dankulov, P. Colomer-de-Simón, A. Jamakovic, P. Ma- hadevan, A. Vahdat, K.E. Bassler, Z. Toroczkai, M. Boguñá, G. Caldarelli, S. Fortunato, D. Krioukov, Nature Communications6(1), 8627 (2015). doi:10.1038/ncomms9627

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms9627 2015

  77. [77]

    doi:10.1109/TNSE.2021.3133380

    K.Nakajima,K.Shudo,N.Masuda,IEEETransactionsonNetworkScienceand Engineering9(3), 1139 (2022). doi:10.1109/TNSE.2021.3133380

    work page doi:10.1109/tnse.2021.3133380 2022

  78. [78]

    Angelini, F

    M.C. Angelini, F. Caltagirone, F. Krzakala, L. Zdeborová, in2015 53rd Annual AllertonConferenceonCommunication,Control,andComputing(IEEE,2015), pp. 66–73. doi:10.1109/ALLERTON.2015.7446987

    work page doi:10.1109/allerton.2015.7446987 2015

  79. [79]

    Stephan, Y

    L. Stephan, Y. Zhu, in2022 IEEE 63rd Annual Symposium on Foun- dations of Computer Science (FOCS)(IEEE, 2022), pp. 567–575. doi:10.1109/FOCS54457.2022.00060

    work page doi:10.1109/focs54457.2022.00060 2022

  80. [80]

    Y. Gu, Y. Polyanskiy, inProceedings of Thirty Sixth Conference on Learning Theory(PMLR, 2023), pp. 885–920.https://proceedings.mlr.press/ v195/gu23b.html

    2023

Showing first 80 references.