Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 673

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modeling bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics

Open access
Vázquez, Alexei, Oliveira, João Gama, Dezsö, Zoltán, Goh, Kwang-Il, Kondor, Imre, Barabási, Albert-László·2006·Physical Review E

Abstract

The dynamics of many social, technological and economic phenomena are driven by individual human actions, turning the quantitative understanding of human behavior into a central question of modern science. Current models of human dynamics, used from risk assessment to communications, assume that human actions are randomly distributed in time and thus well approximated by Poisson processes. Here we provide direct evidence that for five human activity patterns, such as email and letter based communications, web browsing, library visits and stock trading, the timing of individual human actions follow non-Poisson statistics, characterized by bursts of rapidly occurring events separated by long periods of inactivity. We show that the bursty nature of human behavior is a consequence of a decision based queuing process: when individuals execute tasks based on some perceived priority, the timing of the tasks will be heavy tailed, most tasks being rapidly executed, while a few experiencing very long waiting times. In contrast, priority blind execution is well approximated by uniform interevent statistics. We discuss two queuing models that capture human activity. The first model assumes that there are no limitations on the number of tasks an individual can handle at any time, predicting that the waiting time of the individual tasks follow a heavy tailed distribution P(tau(w)) approximately tau(w)(-alpha) with alpha=3/2. The second model imposes limitations on the queue length, resulting in a heavy tailed waiting time distribution characterized by alpha=1. We provide empirical evidence supporting the relevance of these two models to human activity patterns, showing that while emails, web browsing and library visitation display alpha=1, the surface mail based communication belongs to the alpha=3/2 universality class. Finally, we discuss possible extension of the proposed queuing models and outline some future challenges in exploring the statistical mechanics of human dynamics.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physreve.73.036127

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 673

Metadata

Authors
Vázquez, A., Oliveira, J. G., Dezsö, Z., Goh, K.-I., Kondor, I., & Barabási, A.-L.
Venue
Physical Review E
Published
2006-03-24
Volume
73
Issue
3
Pages
036127-036127
ISSN
  • 1539-3755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-2376
OpenAlex
W2073689275
Cited by
673
References
4
FWCI
80.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Modeling bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physreve.73.036127
The paper
Vázquez, A., Oliveira, J. G., Dezsö, Z., Goh, K.-I., Kondor, I., & Barabási, A.-L. (2006). Modeling bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics. Physical Review E. https://doi.org/10.1103/physreve.73.036127

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.