(cid:NN). The PDF this text was extracted from encodes 3 characters in a way that names no letter, so the extractor could not say what they were. The quotes keep them because a quote is reproduced exactly or it proves nothing — the marks are the source’s, not the tagging’s.phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | tie strength and local topology in mobile communication networks— “Here we examine the communication patterns of millions of mobile phone users, allowing us to simultaneously study the local and the global structure of a society-wide communication network.” | |
| claim-type | mechanism— “We show that this coupling significantly slows the diffusion process, resulting in dynamic trapping of information in communities, and find that when it comes to information diffusion, weak and strong ties are both simultaneously ineffective.” | |
| method — evidence | — “A significant portion of a country’s communication network was reconstructed from 18 weeks of all mobile phone call records among approximately 20% of the country’s entire population, 90% of whose inhabitants had a mobile phone subscription (see Supporting Information).” | |
| transfer | from statistical physics / network science: percolation and network analysis (robustness, phase transitions) applied to a society-scale communication network— “social networks are robust to the removal of the strong ties, but fall apart following a phase transition if the weak ties are removed” | transfers[0] |
| mechanism | weak ties bridge otherwise-separate communities, so removing them fragments the network via a percolation-like phase transition (a societal-scale confirmation of Granovetter strength-of-weak-ties)— “This result is broadly consistent with the strength of weak ties hypothesis, offering its first societal-level confirmation” | mechanisms[0] |
| replicates | Granovetter weak-ties hypothesis (1973)— “social networks are robust to the removal of the strong ties, but fall apart following a phase transition if the weak ties are removed” | claim_relations[0] |
| replicates | the strength of weak ties hypothesis (Granovetter)— “This result is broadly consistent with the strength of weak ties hypothesis, offering its first societal-level confirmation.” | claim_relations[1] |
| contradicts | the dyadic hypothesis and the global efficiency principle— “In this paper, taking advantage of society-wide data collection capabilities offered by mobile phone logs, we show that tie strengths correlate with the local network structure around the tie, and both the dyadic hypothesis and the global efficiency principle are unable to account for the empirical observations.” | claim_relations[2] |
| contradicts | the received account of weak ties as the conduits of novel information (Granovetter; Csermely)— “Therefore, in contrast with the celebrated role of weak ties in information access ( , 18 20 ), we find that both weak and strong ties have a relatively insignificant role as conduits for information (“the weakness of weak and strong ties” ): the former because the small amount of on-air time offers little chance of information transfer, and… | claim_relations[3] |
| sense | tie strength - AS AGGREGATED CALL DURATION: the sociological construct is measured by total air time between two people, over links that survive a reciprocity filter, so a strong tie here means many minutes and nothing else— “as the aggregated duration of calls between users A and B” | senses[0] |
| sense | what determines tie strength - THREE NAMED AND INCOMPATIBLE ANSWERS: a global efficiency principle in which strengths are optimised for overall flow, a dyadic hypothesis in which strength is independent of the surrounding network, and the strength of weak ties hypothesis in which it rises with friendship-circle overlap— “Complex networks often organize themselves according to a global efficiency principle, meaning that the tie strengths are optimized to maximize the overall flow in the network (13, 14). In this case the weight of a link should correlate with its betweenness centrality, which is proportional to the number of shortest paths between all pairs of… | senses[1] |
| sense | the mobile call graph - AS A PROXY, AND A SKEWED ONE BY DESIGN: it stands in for the communication network and is biased toward trusted interactions, because people share mobile numbers only with individuals they trust— “the mobile phone data is skewed towards trusted interactions (that is, people tend to share their mobile numbers only with individuals they trust). Therefore, the MCG can be used as a proxy of the communication network between the users” | senses[2] |
| control | the same spreading simulation re-run on the SAME network with every tie strength replaced by the average, giving a constant transmission probability on every link — held — rules out the network's TOPOLOGY as the explanation of the spreading result - the graph is held fixed and only the weights are flattened, so any difference must come from the distribution of tie strengths rather than from who is connected to whom— “As a control, we consider spreading on the same network, but replace all tie strengths with their average value” | controls[0] |
| outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation) | control — held | controls[0] |
| for which use | limitation — every claim about social ties from this graph: THE MCG CAPTURES ONLY A SUBSET OF ALL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS, [excluding] FACE-TO-FACE, EMAIL AND LANDLINE— “Note that the MCG captures only a subset of all interactions between individuals, a detailed mapping of which would require face-to-face, email and landline communications as well.” | limitations[0] |
| for which use | limitation — the link definition: the reciprocity requirement INDUCES SOME FALSE NEGATIVES, I.E. SOME LINKS CORRESPONDING TO GENUINE SOCIAL INTERACTION MAY GO UNDETECTED— “It is possible that this induces some false negatives, i.e. some links corresponding to genuine social interaction may go undetected.” | limitations[1] |
| for which use | limitation — any population-level reading: ALTHOUGH THE DATASET COVERS SOME SEVEN MILLION USERS, IT IS NEVERTHELESS A SAMPLE OF THE UNDERLYING PHONE CALL NETWORK - scale is not coverage— “Although the dataset covers some seven million users, it is nervertheless a sample of the underlying phone call network that consists of all mobile users in the country.” | limitations[2] |
| for which use | limitation — any claim here about the strength of social ties: strength is defined as the aggregated duration of calls between two users, after one-way calls have been eliminated by a reciprocity requirement— “as the aggregated duration of calls between users A and B. This procedure eliminates a large number of one-way calls, most of which correspond to single events, suggesting that they typically reach individuals that the caller does not know personally” | limitations[3] |
| for which use | limitation — conclusions drawn here about human communication: the mobile call graph is used as a proxy for the communication network between users, being skewed toward trusted interactions because people share mobile numbers only with those they trust— “Therefore, the MCG can be used as a proxy of the communication network between the users” | limitations[4] |
| for which use | limitation — the interpretation of the correlation reported here: the paper sets out a dyadic hypothesis, in which strength is independent of the surrounding network, against the strength of weak ties hypothesis, in which strength increases with friendship-circle overlap— “Another possiblility is that the strength of a particular tie depends only on the nature of the relationship between two individuals, and is thus independent of the network surrounding the tie (dyadic hypothesis). Finally, the much studied strength of weak ties hypothesis (18, 19, 20) states that the strength of a tie between A and B… | limitations[5] |
| for which use | limitation — the finding as support for any single theory of tie strength: the authors state it is in part driven by local network structure, in contrast with both a purely dyadic view and a global view— “It suggests that tie strength is, in part, driven by the network structure in the tie’s immediate vicinity. This is in contrast with a purely dyadic view, according to which the tie strength is determined only by the characteristics of the individuals it connects, or the global view, which asserts that tie strength is driven by the whole… | limitations[6] |
| replication | untested | |
| limitation | The reconstructed graph covers only mobile voice calls, not the full range of interactions between people.— “Note that the MCG captures only a subset of all interactions between individuals, a detailed mapping of which would require face-to-face, email and landline communications as well.” | limitations[0] |
| limitation | The reciprocity requirement used to define a link may discard genuine social ties (false negatives).— “It is possible that this induces some false negatives, i.e. some links corresponding to genuine social interaction may go undetected.” | limitations[1] |
| limitation | The data are a single-operator sample of the underlying national call network, not the whole population network.— “Although the dataset covers some seven million users, it is nervertheless a sample of the underlying phone call network that consists of all mobile users in the country.” | limitations[2] |
| limitation | The strength of a social tie is measured as the total time two people spent on the phone.— “as the aggregated duration of calls between users A and B. This procedure eliminates a large number of one-way calls, most of which correspond to single events, suggesting that they typically reach individuals that the caller does not know personally” | limitations[3] |
| limitation | The network studied is a stand-in for the communication network, and the paper says so.— “Therefore, the MCG can be used as a proxy of the communication network between the users” | limitations[4] |
| limitation | Three incompatible accounts of what drives tie strength were on the table before the measurement.— “Another possiblility is that the strength of a particular tie depends only on the nature of the relationship between two individuals, and is thus independent of the network surrounding the tie (dyadic hypothesis). Finally, the much studied strength of weak ties hypothesis (18, 19, 20) states that the strength of a tie between A and B… | limitations[5] |
| limitation | The conclusion sits between the positions rather than choosing one.— “It suggests that tie strength is, in part, driven by the network structure in the tie’s immediate vicinity. This is in contrast with a purely dyadic view, according to which the tie strength is determined only by the characteristics of the individuals it connects, or the global view, which asserts that tie strength is driven by the whole… | limitations[6] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | Phone-communication records of millions of users let the study examine a society-wide network's local and global structure together.— “Here we examine the communication patterns of millions of mobile phone users… | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | Social networks are robust to the removal of strong ties but fall apart in a phase transition if weak ties are removed, and this coupling significantly slows diffusion, trapping information in communities. | content_tags.findings[1] |
| quantity | millions mobile phone users — scale of the society-wide communication network studied | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| variable | diffusion process (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[1] |
| definition | local bridge Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | weak ties hypothesis Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[1] |
| key-terms | ties, network, communication, mobile, diffusion, weak, strong, phone, coupling |
| concept | tie strength Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[4] |
| concept | dyadic hypothesis Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[5] |
| concept | global efficiency principle Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[6] |
| concept | mobile call graph Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[7] |
| concept | betweenness centrality Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[8] |
| bootstrap | as written: bootstrapping Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| evidence status note | bootstrap — QUOTE RECOVERED FROM THE PAPER'S OWN CHARACTERS. The recorded quote was LETTERS-ONLY IDENTICAL to this stretch of the staged text but not an exact substring of it - spaces, hyphens, ligature glyphs or mathematical operators differed, so it could never anchor. This is the file's own text between the same two letters: not produced by a rule about the damage, copied out of the file. Round-trip checked (the recovered span is letters-only equal to the original) and length-checked. The text as originally recorded is kept in evidence as extracted. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| correlation r | as written: correlation coefficient Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| mean μ | as written: mean of Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
| p-value p | as written: p=0.40 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[3] |
| evidence status note | p-value — DAMAGED GLYPHS IN THIS QUOTE: (cid:31). These are raw PDF font glyph indices that leaked out in place of the characters they stand for - usually a mathematical operator. The quote is verbatim to the staged text and its anchor is sound; the STAGED TEXT is what is damaged. NOT repaired: the cid-to-character mapping is defined by the font embedded in that particular PDF, so guessing it would produce a clean and unverifiable quote. Repair needs the source PDF and is a re-staging job. | content_tags.statistics[3] |
| sample-size n/N | as written: sample sizes Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[4] |
| standard-deviation SD/σ | as written: standard deviations Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[5] |
| statistical-significance | as written: significantly Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[6] |
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.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824