Showing posts with label social. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social. Show all posts

Thursday, 19 May 2011

New algorithm offers ability to influence systems such as living cells or social networks

ScienceDaily (May 14, 2011) — At first glance, a diagram of the complex network of genes that regulate cellular metabolism might seem hopelessly complex, and efforts to control such a system futile.

However, an MIT researcher has come up with a new computational model that can analyze any type of complex network -- biological, social or electronic -- and reveal the critical points that can be used to control the entire system.

Potential applications of this work, which appears as the cover story in the May 12 issue of Nature, include reprogramming adult cells and identifying new drug targets, says study author Jean-Jacques Slotine, an MIT professor of mechanical engineering and brain and cognitive sciences.

Slotine and his co-authors applied their model to dozens of real-life networks, including cell-phone networks, social networks, the networks that control gene expression in cells and the neuronal network of the C. elegans worm. For each, they calculated the percentage of points that need to be controlled in order to gain control of the entire system.

For sparse networks such as gene regulatory networks, they found the number is high, around 80 percent. For dense networks -- such as neuronal networks -- it's more like 10 percent.

The paper, a collaboration with Albert-Laszlo Barabasi and Yang-Yu Liu of Northeastern University, builds on more than half a century of research in the field of control theory.

Control theory -- the study of how to govern the behavior of dynamic systems -- has guided the development of airplanes, robots, cars and electronics. The principles of control theory allow engineers to design feedback loops that monitor input and output of a system and adjust accordingly. One example is the cruise control system in a car.

However, while commonly used in engineering, control theory has been applied only intermittently to complex, self-assembling networks such as living cells or the Internet, Slotine says. Control research on large networks has been concerned mostly with questions of synchronization, he says.

In the past 10 years, researchers have learned a great deal about the organization of such networks, in particular their topology -- the patterns of connections between different points, or nodes, in the network. Slotine and his colleagues applied traditional control theory to these recent advances, devising a new model for controlling complex, self-assembling networks.

"The area of control of networks is a very important one, and although much work has been done in this area, there are a number of open problems of outstanding practical significance," says Adilson Motter, associate professor of physics at Northwestern University. The biggest contribution of the paper by Slotine and his colleagues is to identify the type of nodes that need to be targeted in order to control complex networks, says Motter, who was not involved with this research.

The researchers started by devising a new computer algorithm to determine how many nodes in a particular network need to be controlled in order to gain control of the entire network. (Examples of nodes include members of a social network, or single neurons in the brain.)

"The obvious answer is to put input to all of the nodes of the network, and you can, but that's a silly answer," Slotine says. "The question is how to find a much smaller set of nodes that allows you to do that."

There are other algorithms that can answer this question, but most of them take far too long -- years, even. The new algorithm quickly tells you both how many points need to be controlled, and where those points -- known as "driver nodes" -- are located.

Next, the researchers figured out what determines the number of driver nodes, which is unique to each network. They found that the number depends on a property called "degree distribution," which describes the number of connections per node.

A higher average degree (meaning the points are densely connected) means fewer nodes are needed to control the entire network. Sparse networks, which have fewer connections, are more difficult to control, as are networks where the node degrees are highly variable.

In future work, Slotine and his collaborators plan to delve further into biological networks, such as those governing metabolism. Figuring out how bacterial metabolic networks are controlled could help biologists identify new targets for antibiotics by determining which points in the network are the most vulnerable.

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The original article was written by Anne Trafton, MIT News Office.

Journal Reference:

Yang-Yu Liu, Jean-Jacques Slotine, Albert-László Barabási. Controllability of complex networks. Nature, 2011; 473 (7346): 167 DOI: 10.1038/nature10011

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.


View the original article here

Tuesday, 17 May 2011

New algorithm offers ability to influence systems such as living cells or social networks

ScienceDaily (May 14, 2011) — At first glance, a diagram of the complex network of genes that regulate cellular metabolism might seem hopelessly complex, and efforts to control such a system futile.

However, an MIT researcher has come up with a new computational model that can analyze any type of complex network -- biological, social or electronic -- and reveal the critical points that can be used to control the entire system.

Potential applications of this work, which appears as the cover story in the May 12 issue of Nature, include reprogramming adult cells and identifying new drug targets, says study author Jean-Jacques Slotine, an MIT professor of mechanical engineering and brain and cognitive sciences.

Slotine and his co-authors applied their model to dozens of real-life networks, including cell-phone networks, social networks, the networks that control gene expression in cells and the neuronal network of the C. elegans worm. For each, they calculated the percentage of points that need to be controlled in order to gain control of the entire system.

For sparse networks such as gene regulatory networks, they found the number is high, around 80 percent. For dense networks -- such as neuronal networks -- it's more like 10 percent.

The paper, a collaboration with Albert-Laszlo Barabasi and Yang-Yu Liu of Northeastern University, builds on more than half a century of research in the field of control theory.

Control theory -- the study of how to govern the behavior of dynamic systems -- has guided the development of airplanes, robots, cars and electronics. The principles of control theory allow engineers to design feedback loops that monitor input and output of a system and adjust accordingly. One example is the cruise control system in a car.

However, while commonly used in engineering, control theory has been applied only intermittently to complex, self-assembling networks such as living cells or the Internet, Slotine says. Control research on large networks has been concerned mostly with questions of synchronization, he says.

In the past 10 years, researchers have learned a great deal about the organization of such networks, in particular their topology -- the patterns of connections between different points, or nodes, in the network. Slotine and his colleagues applied traditional control theory to these recent advances, devising a new model for controlling complex, self-assembling networks.

"The area of control of networks is a very important one, and although much work has been done in this area, there are a number of open problems of outstanding practical significance," says Adilson Motter, associate professor of physics at Northwestern University. The biggest contribution of the paper by Slotine and his colleagues is to identify the type of nodes that need to be targeted in order to control complex networks, says Motter, who was not involved with this research.

The researchers started by devising a new computer algorithm to determine how many nodes in a particular network need to be controlled in order to gain control of the entire network. (Examples of nodes include members of a social network, or single neurons in the brain.)

"The obvious answer is to put input to all of the nodes of the network, and you can, but that's a silly answer," Slotine says. "The question is how to find a much smaller set of nodes that allows you to do that."

There are other algorithms that can answer this question, but most of them take far too long -- years, even. The new algorithm quickly tells you both how many points need to be controlled, and where those points -- known as "driver nodes" -- are located.

Next, the researchers figured out what determines the number of driver nodes, which is unique to each network. They found that the number depends on a property called "degree distribution," which describes the number of connections per node.

A higher average degree (meaning the points are densely connected) means fewer nodes are needed to control the entire network. Sparse networks, which have fewer connections, are more difficult to control, as are networks where the node degrees are highly variable.

In future work, Slotine and his collaborators plan to delve further into biological networks, such as those governing metabolism. Figuring out how bacterial metabolic networks are controlled could help biologists identify new targets for antibiotics by determining which points in the network are the most vulnerable.

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The original article was written by Anne Trafton, MIT News Office.

Journal Reference:

Yang-Yu Liu, Jean-Jacques Slotine, Albert-László Barabási. Controllability of complex networks. Nature, 2011; 473 (7346): 167 DOI: 10.1038/nature10011

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.


View the original article here

Tuesday, 10 May 2011

Nonprofit health organizations increase health literacy through social media

ScienceDaily (May 4, 2011) — As the presence of social media continues to increase as a form of communication, health organizations are searching for the most effective ways to use the online tools to pass important information to the public. Now, researchers at the University of Missouri have found that nonprofit organizations and community groups appear to be more actively engaged in posting health information and interacting with the public on Twitter than other types of health-related organizations, such as health business corporations, educational institutions and government agencies.

"Twitter may be more appealing to nonprofit organizations because it creates a barrier-free environment that allows these organizations to share important information through real-time exchanges without significant efforts," said Hyojung Park, a doctoral candidate at the Missouri School of Journalism. "Unlike business organizations such as pharmaceutical companies, nonprofit health organizations and advocacy groups may suffer from lack of funding, staff, and other resources in developing and implementing communication strategies for health intervention and promotion programs. Thus, it is likely that nonprofit organizations and support groups recognize the rapid growth of Twitter and its value as an inexpensive but highly effective communication tool."

In her study, Park explored how health-related organizations use Twitter, which is a popular social media outlet, to promote health literacy in society and to raise awareness of their brands and manage their images. The study included a content analysis of 571 tweets from health-related organizations. Park found that nonprofit health groups do an effective job of incorporating interactive elements into their communication planning.

"Recent studies have shown that most social media users want organizations to be actively involved in social media and to communicate and engage the users directly," Park said. "Nonprofit health groups do a great job of this, which helps them communicate their health messages and, ultimately, to increase health literacy in the community."

Park also found that about 30 percent of health "tweets" were actually re-published or "re-tweeted" by readers who found the information useful or interesting. These retweets result in an even larger audience for the health messages. Park says that this shows how dynamic and multidirectional communication on social networking sites such as Twitter hold great potential for health-related organizations to increase the awareness of health literacy, share resources, and foster public discussion. Park hopes future research will shed even more insight into how health organizations can effectively communicate their messages.

"There is a need for understanding how to use social networking sites as a cost-effective communication tool to deliver important health information and increase health literacy," Park said. "With an understanding of users of social networking sites and potential supporters for health organizations, this line of research may also help those organizations design health messages tailored to target audiences, as well as develop communication strategies for a general audience."

This study was published in the Journal of Health Communication and was supported by the Health Communication Research Center at the Missouri School of Journalism. The study was co-authored by Shelly Rodgers, associate professor in the Missouri School of Journalism, and Jon Stemmle, associate director of the Health Communication Research Center.

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by University of Missouri-Columbia.

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.


View the original article here

Saturday, 7 May 2011

Ranking research: Using social bookmarking tools to extract relevance

ScienceDaily (May 3, 2011) — A new approach to evaluating research papers exploits social bookmarking tools to extract relevance. Details are reported in the latest issue of the International Journal of Internet Technology and Secured Transactions.

Social bookmarking systems are almost indispensible. Very few of us do not use at least one system whether it's Delicious, Connotea, Trunk.ly, Reddit or any of countless others. For Academics and researchers CiteULike is one of the most popular and has been around since November 2004. CiteUlike (http://www.CiteULike.org) allows users to bookmark references but also embeds more conventional bibliographic management. As users of such systems quickly learn the only way to make them useful for others is to ensure that you tag your references comprehensively, but selectively.

On the whole, social bookmarking is very useful but it could be even more so if, rather than using similarity ranking or query-dependent ranking for generating search results if it had a better ranking system.

Researchers in Thailand have now proposed "CiteRank," a combination of a similarity ranking with a static ranking. "Similarity ranking measures the match between a query and a research paper index," they explain. "While a static ranking, or a query-independent ranking, measures the quality of a research paper." Siripun Sanguansintukul of Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok and colleagues have used a group of factors including number of groups citing the posted paper, year of publication, research paper post date, and priority of a research paper to determine a static ranking score, which is then combined with the query-independent measure to give the CiteRank.

The team tested their new ranking algorithm by asking literature researchers to rate the results it produced in ranking research papers obtained from the search engines based on an index that uses, TTA, tag-title-abstract. The weighted algorithm CiteRank 80:20 in which a combination of similarity ranking 80% and static ranking 20% was most effective. They found that many literature researchers preferred to read more recent paper or just-posted papers but they also rated highly classic papers that emerged in the results if they were posted across different user groups or communities. Users found good papers based on priority rating but TTA was still important.

"CiteRank combines static ranking with similarity ranking to enhance the effectiveness of the ranking order," explains Sanguansintukul. "Similarity ranking measures the similarity of the text (query) with the document. Static ranking employed the factors posted on paper. Four factors used are: year of publication, posted time, priority rating and number of groups that contained the posted paper."

"Improving indexing not only enhances the performance of academic paper searches, but also all document searches in general. Future research in the area consists of extending the personalization; creating user profiling and recommender system on research paper searching." the team says. The experimental factors that emerged from the study, can help in the optimization of the algorithm to adjust rankings and to improve search results still further.

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Inderscience Publishers, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Journal Reference:

Pijitra Jomsri, Siripun Sanguansintukul, Worasit Choochaiwattana. CiteRank: combination similarity and static ranking with research paper searching. International Journal of Internet Technology and Secured Transactions, 2011; 3 (2): 161 DOI: 10.1504/IJITST.2011.039776

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.


View the original article here

Thursday, 5 May 2011

Higher levels of social activity decrease the risk of cognitive decline

ScienceDaily (Apr. 25, 2011) — If you want to keep your brain healthy, it turns out that visiting friends, attending parties, and even going to church might be just as good for you as crossword puzzles.

According to research conducted at Rush University Medical Center, frequent social activity may help to prevent or delay cognitive decline in old age. The study has just been posted online in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society.

The researchers were especially careful in their analysis to try to rule out the possibility that cognitive decline precedes, or causes, social isolation, and not the reverse.

"It's logical to think that when someone's cognitive abilities break down, they are less likely to go out and meet friends, enjoy a camping trip, or participate in community clubs. If memory and thinking capabilities fail, socializing becomes difficult," said lead researcher Bryan James, PhD, postdoctoral fellow in the epidemiology of aging and dementia in the Rush Alzheimer's Disease Center. "But our findings suggest that social inactivity itself leads to cognitive impairments."

The study included 1,138 older adults with a mean age of 80 who are participating in the Rush Memory and Aging Project, an ongoing longitudinal study of common chronic conditions of aging. They each underwent yearly evaluations that included a medical history and neuropsychological tests.

Social activity was measured based on a questionnaire that asked participants whether, and how often, in the previous year they had engaged in activities that involve social interaction -- for example, whether they went to restaurants, sporting events or the teletract (off-track betting) or played bingo; went on day trips or overnight trips; did volunteer work; visited relatives or friends; participated in groups such as the Knights of Columbus; or attended religious services.

Cognitive function was assessed using a battery of 19 tests for various types of memory (episodic, semantic and working memory), as well as perceptual speed and visuospatial ability.

At the start of the investigation, all participants were free of any signs of cognitive impairment. Over an average of five years, however, those who were more socially active showed reduced rates of cognitive decline. On average, those who had the highest levels of social activity (the 90th percentile) experienced only one quarter of the rate of cognitive decline experienced by the least socially active individuals. Other variables that might have accounted for the increase in cognitive decline -- such as age, physical exercise, and health -- were all ruled out in the analysis.

Why social activity plays a role in the development of cognitive problems is not clear. According to James, one possibility is that "social activity challenges older adults to participate in complex interpersonal exchanges, which could promote or main efficient neural networks in a case of 'use it or lose it.'"

Future research is needed to determine whether interventions aimed at increasing late-life social activity can play a part in delaying or preventing cognitive decline, James said.

Other researchers at Rush involved in the study were Robert Wilson, PhD, Lisa Barnes, PhD, and David Bennett, MD.

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Rush University Medical Center, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Journal Reference:

Bryan D. James, Robert S. Wilson, Lisa L. Barnes, David A. Bennett. Late-Life Social Activity and Cognitive Decline in Old Age. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 2011; 1 DOI: 10.1017/S1355617711000531

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.


View the original article here