Testing for Differences in Stochastic Network Structure
随机网络结构差异检验AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确以随机图模型、邻接矩阵、网络稀疏性和节点度异质性为研究对象,直接对应网络与干扰中的网络方法。
随机网络结构差异检验AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
How can one determine whether a treatment, such as the introduction of a social program or trade shock, alters agents' incentives to form links in a network? This paper proposes analogs of a two‐sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, widely used in the literature to test the null hypothesis of no treatment effects, for network data. It first specifies a testing problem in which the null hypothesis is that two networks are drawn from the same random graph model. It then describes two randomization tests based on the magnitude of the difference between the networks' adjacency matrices as measured by the 2 → 2 and ∞ → 1 operator norms. Power properties of the tests are examined analytically, in simulation, and through two real‐world applications. A key finding is that the test based on the ∞ → 1 norm can be much more powerful for the kinds of sparse and degree‐heterogeneous networks common in economics.