The Structure and Function of Complex Networks

M. E. J. Newman · SIAM Review / arXiv · 2003 · network-science · 10.1137/S003614450342480 · record newman2003-complex-networks
tag layer · index · concepts · authors · עברית

Where this record's text came from. faceted 2026-08 by reading the locally held text (pdftext); every evidence string verified as an exact substring of that text before merging. Claim relations left EMPTY deliberately: as a review the article cites hundreds of works, but nowhere does it state an explicit builds-on/extends/contradicts relation between itself and a named prior study. The closest is the 'Other resources' paragraph, which merely points readers to the reviews of Albert and Barabasi and of Dorogovtsev and Mendes; per the instruction not to infer relations from citations, I recorded none. Replication status = 'replicated' because the review's central observation rests on the same signatures being measured independently across many different networks: 'They have highly distinctive statistical signatures, some of which, such as high clustering coefficients and highly skewed degree distributions, are common to networks of a wide variety of types.' The limitations recorded are stated in the first person ('we do not yet...') about the state of the field the review covers, which is the only form of self-limitation this article offers. 2026-08-14, 2026-08-15 and 2026-08-26 schema-0.3 passes: every quote verified as an exact substring of the staged text and anchored at merge time; concept terms verified present; every edge endpoint an existing node.

Some words in these quotes contain the wrong character. The PDF this text was extracted from substituted 1 character inside a word — a currency sign or a stray accent where a letter pair belongs, as in signi¢cantly for significantly, or a single ligature glyph, as in conﬁdence. They are valid characters in the wrong place, so they survive every encoding check. The quotes keep them for the same reason as above, and a search of this page will not find the affected words.

1 quotation on this page contains a reference number where the paper printed a superscript. This journal style prints citations as raised numerals — parameters^12,13 — and the extraction flattened them into the line, so the sentence reads parameters 12 , 13 . The digits are citation markers and not part of what the author wrote. The quotes keep them for the same reason they keep every other extraction fault: a quote is reproduced exactly or it proves nothing.

This record’s own method is review, and the tags below follow from that. A review’s findings, quantities and statistics are things stated IN this paper, and some of them report results obtained elsewhere. No tag on this page names a different author. Measured across every review in this corpus, 81% of a review’s tags carry no citation at all — most of them are the review speaking. The corpus does not adjudicate the rest: read an unmarked tag as a claim this paper makes, not necessarily one it made first.

How to read this page. The article itself is not reproduced here — this paper is not cleared for redistribution, so what follows is the tag layer alone. The evidence sentences are withheld with the article. The table at the foot lists every tag the record carries; each row names the facet it belongs to, and the whose words column says whether the tag records the paper's own wording or the tagger's sentence about the paper. Every tag links to each other paper in the corpus carrying it. The machine-readable edition of the same thing is the TEI file beside this one, where the tags live in standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.

Other fields define these differently the same word, defined another way in another discipline
sample-size 5 fields · homophily 3 fields · clustering 3 fields · connectivity 2 fields · statistical-significance 2 fields · vertices 2 fields

Tags on this paper

Every tag the record carries, each linking to every other paper in the corpus that carries it. A tag appears here whether or not its words occur in the article — the spans below are only the ones a sentence in this paper licenses. Of the 22 concept tags on this paper, 18 are grounded in a quoted sentence. 15 carry the tagger's gloss of what the term means in this paper, which is not something the article can license.

complex network small-world network scale-free network community structure graph theory degree distribution network clustering coefficient connectivity assortative mixing homophily fraction of transitive triples Vertex Edge network transitivity site node actor bond link tie clustering generative network models - random graphs and growth with preferential attachment - reproduce the observed structure of real networks (skewed degree distributions, small-world, clustering) networks degree vertices edges scale-free small-world distribution preferential correlation hypothesis-testing hypothesis testing mean mean value sample-size sample size statistical-significance review

Legend

relation to other work	`claim_relations`	how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies
claim type	`claim_type`	the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null
concept edge	`concept_edges`	an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it
concept	`concepts`	an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it
content tag	`content_tags`	a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper
limitation	`limitations`	what the paper says its evidence cannot support
mechanism	`mechanisms`	how the reported effect is said to come about
method	`method`	how the paper produced its evidence
phenomenon	`phenomenon`	the effect or regularity under study
sense	`senses`	a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it
transfer	`transfers`	a method or concept carried in from another field

The paper

The full text is not reproduced here. This article is not cleared for redistribution, so the page carries the tag layer only. Its evidence sentences are withheld; the grounding status remains with each tag, and the article itself is at https://doi.org/10.1137/S003614450342480. The reading view exists for the papers whose licence permits it.

Every tag on this page

claim_relations 3 · claim_type 1 · concept_edges 9 · concepts 18 · content_tags 8 · limitations 7 · mechanisms 1 · method 1 · phenomenon 1 · senses 8 · transfers 1

Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; 8 of 9 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.

This record holds no controls. A layer is empty when the tagger recorded nothing in it — which is not the same as the paper having nothing to record.

facet	tag	field	conf.	whose words
claim_type	existence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_type`		the paper's words
phenomenon	structure and function of complex networks Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`phenomenon`		the paper's words
method	review Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: review	`method`		the paper's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: generative network models - random graphs and growth with preferential attachment - reproduce the observed structure of real networks (skewed degree distributions, small-world, clustering)	`mechanisms[0]`		the tagger's words
limitations	the crucial theoretical developments in the field remain open Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the theoretical claims of the review: IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN WHAT THE CRUCIAL THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENTS WILL BE IN THIS AREA	`limitations[0]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The review acknowledges that the study of networks is incomplete and that only some of the described network variants are covered by the work it reviews. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the coverage of the survey: THE STUDY OF NETWORKS IS BY NO MEANS A COMPLETE SCIENCE YET, AND MANY OF THE POSSIBILITIES HAVE YET TO BE EXPLORED IN DEPTH	`limitations[1]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The field reviewed has no systematic programme for characterising network structure, so the measures surveyed may not be the important ones. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: every structural measure surveyed: WE DO NOT YET, AS WE DO IN SOME OTHER FIELDS, HAVE A SYSTEMATIC PROGRAM FOR CHARACTERIZING NETWORK STRUCTURE - the measures are ad hoc by the review's own account	`limitations[2]`		the tagger's words
limitations	Little can be reported on the third aim of the field - the effect of structure on system behaviour - because that work is only beginning. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: any structure-to-behaviour claim: STUDIES OF THE EFFECTS OF STRUCTURE ON SYSTEM BEHAVIOR ... ARE STILL IN THEIR INFANCY	`limitations[3]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The review closes by stating that the whole subject it surveys is at an early stage. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the settledness of everything the review surveys: THE STUDY OF COMPLEX NETWORKS IS STILL IN ITS INFANCY	`limitations[4]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The name in general use is stated to overreach: only the degree distribution is scale-free, while other properties of the same networks do have scales. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the term scale-free network as a description of the whole network: the review states only the degree distribution is scale-free and other properties usually do have scales	`limitations[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	Two different exponents for the same citation network were published by the same author: 2.5 to 3, then 3.04. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: a published power-law exponent for a citation network: this review records the same author revising his own value in a later paper	`limitations[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
transfers	building the study of complex networks on the foundation of mathematical graph theory, with statistical-physics methods Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[0]`		the tagger's words
concepts	scale-free network Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: scale-free network	`concepts[2]`		the paper's words
concepts	degree distribution Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: degree distribution	`concepts[5]`		the paper's words
concepts	network Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: network	`concepts[6]`		the paper's words
concepts	clustering coefficient Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. about this quote: THE TERM IS NOT IN THE QUOTE - the quote's 'C' is the clustering coefficient, which the paper defines two paragraphs earlier ('defining a clustering coefficient C thus'). That definition is not quoted because the equation it introduces did not survive text extraction. also in: clustering coefficient	`concepts[7]`	1.0	the paper's words
concepts	connectivity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: connectivity	`concepts[8]`	1.0	the paper's words
concepts	assortative mixing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: assortative mixing	`concepts[9]`	1.0	the paper's words
concepts	homophily Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: homophily	`concepts[10]`	1.0	the paper's words
concepts	fraction of transitive triples Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: fraction of transitive triples	`concepts[11]`	1.0	the paper's words
concepts	Vertex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Vertex	`concepts[12]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	Edge Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Edge	`concepts[13]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	network transitivity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: network transitivity	`concepts[14]`	0.9	the paper's words
concepts	site Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: site	`concepts[15]`	0.75	the paper's words
concepts	node Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: node	`concepts[16]`	0.75	the paper's words
concepts	actor Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: actor	`concepts[17]`	0.75	the paper's words
concepts	bond Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: bond	`concepts[18]`	0.75	the paper's words
concepts	link Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: link	`concepts[19]`	0.75	the paper's words
concepts	tie Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: tie	`concepts[20]`	0.75	the paper's words
concepts	clustering Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: clustering	`concepts[21]`	0.8	the paper's words
senses	scale-free network - the term in general use, which the review says applies only to the degree distribution and not to the network's other properties Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[0]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	network - the stipulated vocabulary of the review: a set of items called vertices, with connections between them called edges Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[1]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	`connectivity` - A NAME THIS REVIEW REFUSES, AND IT SAYS WHY: `Quotation withheld` A refusal grounded in COLLISION WITH A NEIGHBOURING FIELD rather than in the term being wrong - the new usage is intelligible and is declined because the word is already taken. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[2]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	`network density` - THE SAME WORDS NAMING A DIFFERENT QUANTITY BY FIELD: in sociology it names the LOCAL clustering coefficient Ci of a single vertex, which is what this passage records. Elsewhere `density` names the global edge count over possible edges. A reader who imports the sociological sense into the physics literature is reading a per-vertex quantity as a whole-graph one. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[3]`	0.9	the tagger's words
senses	`assortative mixing` / `homophily` / `assortative matching` - ONE PHENOMENON, THREE NAMES, AND THE REVIEW ATTRIBUTES EACH TO ITS FIELD: `called assortative mixing or homophily` in social networks and epidemiology, while `the term ASSORTATIVE MATCHING is also seen in THE ECOLOGY LITERATURE, particularly in reference to mate choice among animals`. The ecological name carries a narrower referent - mate choice - inside the same concept. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	`clustering coefficient` / `fraction of transitive triples` - ONE QUANTITY, TWO FIELD-LOCAL NAMES, and the review is explicit that the DEFINITION is the same one: `The definition of C given here has been widely used in the sociology literature, where it is referred to as the “fraction of transitive triples”.` FILED AS A SENSE AND NOT AS A `renamed-across-fields` EDGE ON PURPOSE: the gate requires a renaming clause to contain BOTH names, and this one calls the physics-side quantity `C` rather than `clustering coefficient`. The only span naming both runs back through Eq. (3). A CLAUSE NAMING ONE NAME IS A DEFINITION, NOT A RENAMING - the gate is right, and the reading survives at the sense layer where it is grounded in what the sentence actually says. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[5]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	`Vertex` / `site` / `node` / `actor` - ONE OBJECT, FOUR NAMES, AND THE PAPER PRINTS THE DISCIPLINE BESIDE EACH. `The fundamental unit of a network, also called a site (physics), a node (computer science), or an actor (sociology).` This is the corpus's cleanest instance of renaming-across-fields: not reconstructed from two papers that never cite each other, but asserted in a glossary by an author who works in all three literatures. The same sentence does it AGAIN for `Edge` / `bond` / `link` / `tie`, with the same three fields in the same order. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[6]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	`clustering` - A NAME THAT COLLIDES INSIDE ITS OWN FIELD, AND THE PAPER SAYS SO WHILE USING IT. `Quotation withheld` The other meaning is community detection. The alias is not across fields - it is a collision WITHIN one, and the author records the ambiguity rather than resolving it. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[7]`	0.9	the tagger's words
claim_relations	qualifies → Barabási and Albert, preferential attachment Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: WHICH NAME THE MODEL TRAVELS UNDER, AND THE REVIEW SAYS THE EARLIER ONE DID NOT: 'The work of PRICE himself, however, is LARGELY UNKNOWN in the scientific community, and CUMULATIVE ADVANTAGE did not achieve currency as a model of network growth until its REDISCOVERY some decades later by Barabási and Albert, Quotation withheld.' One mechanism, two names, and the currency followed the second - so a search on either name finds only half the literature	`claim_relations[0]`	0.95	the tagger's words
claim_relations	contradicts → the preferential-attachment model as a model of the Web Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: WHETHER THE MODEL'S OWN PREDICTION APPEARS IN THE DATA IT IS APPLIED TO. The model implies older vertices have higher degree; 'This correlation between degree and age has been used by Adamic and Huberman to argue against the model as a model of the World Wide Web - Quotation withheld.' The refutation is of the model AS APPLIED TO THE WEB, not of the mechanism in general	`claim_relations[1]`	0.9	the tagger's words
claim_relations	reinterprets → Milgram's small-world experiment Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: WHAT THE SAME EXPERIMENT IS EVIDENCE FOR. 'there is another conclusion that can be drawn from this experiment which Milgram apparently failed to notice; it was pointed out in 2000 by Kleinberg' - roughly three decades later. The finding was in the data the whole time and needed a different question asked of it, which is the strongest kind of case for a layer that records what a result was taken to show	`claim_relations[2]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concept_edges	scale-free network —operationalised-as→ degree distribution Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span says only the degree distributions of such networks are scale-free; operationalised-as is loose. also in: scale-free network · degree distribution	`concept_edges[0]`		the tagger's words
concept_edges	assortative mixing —same-as→ homophily Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 1 · note: 'called assortative mixing OR homophily' - a bare disjunction, no hedge, and the review uses both terms interchangeably thereafter. · the relation stated: the review names them as alternatives for one another in the same clause also in: assortative mixing · homophily	`concept_edges[1]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	Vertex —renamed-across-fields→ site Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 1 · note: THE PAPER NAMES THE DISCIPLINE ITSELF - 'site (physics)' - so the field boundary is the paper's claim, not our inference. 'site' on its own is an ordinary English word; the discipline label is what makes this edge safe to traverse, and it lives here. · the relation stated: also called a site (physics) also in: Vertex · site	`concept_edges[2]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concept_edges	Vertex —renamed-across-fields→ node Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 1 · note: THE PAPER NAMES THE DISCIPLINE ITSELF - 'node (computer science)' - so the field boundary is the paper's claim, not our inference. 'node' on its own is an ordinary English word; the discipline label is what makes this edge safe to traverse, and it lives here. · the relation stated: also called a node (computer science) also in: Vertex · node	`concept_edges[3]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concept_edges	Vertex —renamed-across-fields→ actor Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 1 · note: THE PAPER NAMES THE DISCIPLINE ITSELF - 'actor (sociology)' - so the field boundary is the paper's claim, not our inference. 'actor' on its own is an ordinary English word; the discipline label is what makes this edge safe to traverse, and it lives here. · the relation stated: also called a actor (sociology) also in: Vertex · actor	`concept_edges[4]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concept_edges	Edge —renamed-across-fields→ bond Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 1 · note: THE PAPER NAMES THE DISCIPLINE ITSELF - 'bond (physics)' - so the field boundary is the paper's claim, not our inference. 'bond' on its own is an ordinary English word; the discipline label is what makes this edge safe to traverse, and it lives here. · the relation stated: also called a bond (physics) also in: Edge · bond	`concept_edges[5]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concept_edges	Edge —renamed-across-fields→ link Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 1 · note: THE PAPER NAMES THE DISCIPLINE ITSELF - 'link (computer science)' - so the field boundary is the paper's claim, not our inference. 'link' on its own is an ordinary English word; the discipline label is what makes this edge safe to traverse, and it lives here. · the relation stated: also called a link (computer science) also in: Edge · link	`concept_edges[6]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concept_edges	Edge —renamed-across-fields→ tie Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 1 · note: THE PAPER NAMES THE DISCIPLINE ITSELF - 'tie (sociology)' - so the field boundary is the paper's claim, not our inference. 'tie' on its own is an ordinary English word; the discipline label is what makes this edge safe to traverse, and it lives here. · the relation stated: also called a tie (sociology) also in: Edge · tie	`concept_edges[7]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concept_edges	network transitivity —renamed-across-fields→ clustering Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 0.8 · note: AN ALIAS THE PAPER SUPPLIES AND SIMULTANEOUSLY WARNS AGAINST: 'although the latter…'. Weight 0.8, not 1.0 - 'sometimes also called' is itself a hedge, and the paper is recording usage it does not endorse. · the relation stated: sometimes also called clustering Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span says transitivity is 'sometimes also called clustering', a term with another meaning; renamed-across-fields is loose. also in: network transitivity · clustering	`concept_edges[8]`	0.85	the tagger's words
content_tags	A review of network science covering the small-world effect, degree distributions, clustering, network correlations, random graph models, models of growth and preferential attachment, and dynamical processes on networks. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Inspired by empirical studies of the Internet, social networks and biological networks, researchers have developed techniques and models to understand or predict the behavior of these systems. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. about this quote: QUOTE REPAIRED: the extractor split a hyphen-space and the quote was recorded faithfully with the damage in it, which made it unanchorable. The repaired string is an EXACT SUBSTRING of the staged text - that is why it was accepted, not because a rule produced it. The text as originally recorded is kept in evidence as extracted.	`content_tags.findings[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	network Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: network	`content_tags.definitions[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	correlation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: correlation	`content_tags.statistics[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	hypothesis-testing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: hypothesis-testing	`content_tags.statistics[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	mean Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: mean	`content_tags.statistics[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	sample-size Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: sample-size	`content_tags.statistics[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	statistical-significance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: statistical-significance	`content_tags.statistics[6]`		the tagger's words

Interpretive choices

Tags that could not be placed in the text:

none — every tag was located in the text

What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.