The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
k-core: Theories and applications
Abstract
Abstract With the rapid development of science and technology, the world is becoming increasingly connected. The following dire need for understanding both the relationships amongst individuals and the global structural characteristics brings forward the study of network sciences and many interdisciplinary subjects in recent years. As a result, it is crucial to have methods and algorithms that help us to unveil the structural properties of a network. Over the past few decades, many essential algorithms have been developed by scientists from many different fields. This review will focus on one of the most widely used methods called the k -core decomposition. The k -core decomposition is to find the largest subgraph of a network, in which each node has at least k neighbors in the subgraph. The most commonly used algorithm to perform k -core decomposition is a pruning process that to recursively remove the nodes that have degrees less than k . The algorithm was firstly proposed by Seidman in 1983 and soon became one of the most popular algorithms to detect the network structure due to its simplicity and broad applicability. This algorithm is widely adopted to find the densest part of a network across a broad range of scientific subjects including biology, network science, computer science, ecology, economics, social sciences, etc., so to achieve the vital knowledge under different contexts. Besides, a few physicists find that an exciting phase transition emerges with various critical behaviors during the pruning process. This review aims at filling the gap by making a comprehensive review of the theoretical advances on k -core decomposition problem, along with a review of a few applications of the k -core decomposition from many interdisciplinary perspectives.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fortunato, S. (2010) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002 · Cited by 11,293
What is Twitter, a social network or a news media?
Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010) · Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1772690.1772751 · Cited by 6,652
Rich-club organization of the human connectome
van den Heuvel, M. P., & Sporns, O. (2011) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3539-11.2011 · Cited by 2,354
Detecting rich-club ordering in complex networks
Colizza, V., Flammini, A., Serrano, M. A., & Vespignani, A. (2006) · Nature Physics · doi:10.1038/nphys209 · Cited by 1,001
Modeling Users' Activity on Twitter Networks: Validation of Dunbar's Number
Gonçalves, B., Perra, N., & Vespignani, A. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022656 · Cited by 638
The dynamics of protest recruitment through an online network
González-Bailón, S., Borge-Holthoefer, J., Rivero, A., & Moreno, Y. (2011) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep00197 · Cited by 571
Cited by
Percolation on complex networks: Theory and application
Li, M., Liu, R.-R., Lü, L., Hu, M.-B., Xu, S., & Zhang, Y.-C. (2021) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2020.12.003 · Cited by 365
Self-citationJohnson, Z., Anderson, D., Cheung, M. S., & Bohutskyi, P. (2025) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2025.1569559 · Cited by 12
Investigating Fake and Reliable News Sources Using Complex Networks Analysis
Mazzeo, V., & Rapisarda, A. (2022) · Frontiers in Physics · doi:10.3389/fphy.2022.886544 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Kong, Y.-X., Shi, G.-Y., Wu, R.-J., & Zhang, Y.-C.
- Venue
- Physics Reports
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-11
- Volume
- 832
- Pages
- 1-32
- ISSN
- 0370-1573 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2986386290
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 5.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.