The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Rumors in a Network: Who's the Culprit?
Abstract
We provide a systematic study of the problem of finding the source of a rumor in a network. We model rumor spreading in a network with the popular susceptible-infected (SI) model and then construct an estimator for the rumor source. This estimator is based upon a novel topological quantity which we term rumor centrality. We establish that this is a maximum likelihood (ML) estimator for a class of graphs. We find the following surprising threshold phenomenon: on trees which grow faster than a line, the estimator always has nontrivial detection probability, whereas on trees that grow like a line, the detection probability will go to 0 as the network grows. Simulations performed on synthetic networks such as the popular small-world and scale-free networks, and on real networks such as an internet AS network and the U.S. electric power grid network, show that the estimator either finds the source exactly or within a few hops of the true source across different network topologies. We compare rumor centrality to another common network centrality notion known as distance centrality. We prove that on trees, the rumor center and distance center are equivalent, but on general networks, they may differ. Indeed, simulations show that rumor centrality outperforms distance centrality in finding rumor sources in networks which are not tree-like.
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
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135
Cited by
False rumors detection on Sina Weibo by propagation structures
Wu, K., Yang, S., & Zhu, K. Q. (2015) · 2015 IEEE 31st International Conference on Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/icde.2015.7113322 · Cited by 585
Online misinformation about climate change
Treen, K. M. D., Williams, H. T. P., & O'Neill, S. J. (2020) · WIREs Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.665 · Cited by 441
Identifying rumors and their sources in social networks
Seo, E., Mohapatra, P., & Abdelzaher, T. (2012) · SPIE Proceedings · doi:10.1117/12.919823 · Cited by 133
Multiple Rumor Source Detection with Graph Convolutional Networks
Dong, M., Zheng, B., Quoc Viet Hung, N., Su, H., & Li, G. (2019) · Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/3357384.3357994 · Cited by 119
The Web of False Information: Rumors, Fake News, Hoaxes, Clickbait, and Various Other Shenanigans
Zannettou, S., Sirivianos, M., Blackburn, J., & Kourtellis, N. (2019) · Journal of Data and Information Quality · doi:10.1145/3309699 · Cited by 86
Metadata
- Authors
- Shah, D., & Zaman, T.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
- Published
- 2011-08
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 5163-5181
- ISSN
- 0018-9448 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-9654
- OpenAlex
- W2111772797
- Cited by
- 691
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.91
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Rumors in a Network: Who's the Culprit? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tit.2011.2158885
- The paper
- Shah, D., & Zaman, T. (2011). Rumors in a Network: Who's the Culprit? IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. https://doi.org/10.1109/tit.2011.2158885
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.