Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Stepping back from the trees to see the forest: a network approach to valuing intelligence

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Social Network Analysis and Mining Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Determining the value of intelligence can be a difficult problem. One way to value intelligence is to judge a document’s worth by its location within a structure of a given corpus of documents. Citation networks and Google’s PageRank algorithm are examples of valuing information based on its location within a structure. Dynamic network analysis (DNA) has been used to allow a multilayered approach to social network analysis by including multi-nodal networks and creating inferences across networks with common nodes. We introduce the application of the DNA layered approach to information networks in an attempt to determine the value of intelligence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boccaletti S et al (2006) Complex networks: structure and dynamics. Phys Rep 424(4):175–308

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bergstra JA, Klop JW (1984) Process algebra for synchronous communication. Inf Control 60(1):109–137

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bolz J et al. (2003) Sparse matrix solvers on the GPU: conjugate gradients and multigrid. ACM Trans Gr (TOG). 22(3)

  • Bollen J, Rodriquez MA, Van de Sompel H (2006) Journal status. Scientometrics 69(3):669–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti SP, Halgin DS (2011) On network theory. Organ Sci 22(5):1168–1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) UCINET 6 for windows: software for Social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, Harvard

    Google Scholar 

  • Campiteli MG et al. (2010) Hirsch index as a network centrality measure. arXiv preprint arXiv:1005.4803

  • Carley KM (2003) Dynamic network analysis. In: Dynamic social network modeling and analysis: workshop summary and papers. Committee on Human Factors, National Research Council

  • Carley KM (2006) A dynamic network approach to the assessment of terrorist groups and the impact of alternative courses of action. Carnegie-Mellon univ Pittsburgh Pa Inst of Software Research Internat, 2006

  • Carley KM, Lee JS, Krackhardt D (2002) Destabilizing networks1. Connections 24(3):79–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley KM et al. (2003) Destabilizing dynamic covert networks. In: Proceedings of the 8th international command and control research and technology symposium

  • Carley KM, Reminga J, Kamneva N (1998) Destabilizing terrorist networks. Institute for Software Research 45

  • Dellavalle RP et al (2007) Refining dermatology journal impact factors using PageRank. J Am Acad Dermatol 57(1):116–119

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Diesner J, Carley KM (2005) Revealing social structure from texts: meta-matrix text analysis as a novel method for network text analysis. Causal Mapp Inf Syst Technol Res Approaches, Adv Illus 81–108

  • Ding Y et al (2009) PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol 60(11):2229–2243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorogovtsev SN, Mendes Jose FF (2002) Evolution of networks. Adv Phys 51(4):1079–1187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladwell M (2006) The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. Little, Brown

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(46):16569–16572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan E (2012) OR forum–intelligence operations research: the 2010 Philip McCord Morse Lecture. Operations Research Articles in Advance. 1–13. http://or.journal.informs.org/content/early/2012/07/03/opre.1120.1059.full.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2012

  • Krackhardt D, Carley KM (1998) PCANS model of structure in organizations. Carnegie Mellon University, Institute for Complex Engineered Systems, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Krüger J, Westermann R (2003) Linear algebra operators for GPU implementation of numerical algorithms. ACM Trans Gr (TOG). 22(3)

  • Li H et al. (2006) CiteSeerx: an architecture and web service design for an academic document search engine. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on World Wide Web. ACM

  • Newman MEJ (2003) The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Rev 45(2):167–256

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Newman M (2010) Networks: an introduction. Oxford University Press Inc, Oxford

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Nisonger TE (1999) JASIS and library and information science journal rankings: a review and analysis of the last half-century. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 50(11):1004–1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otte E, Rousseau R (2002) Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. J Inf Sci 28(6):441–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padgett JF, Ansell CK (1993) Robust action and the rise of the medici, 1400–1434. Am J Sociol 1259–1319

  • Pinski G, Narin F (1976) Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: theory, with application to the literature of physics. Inf Process Manage 12(5):297–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radicchi F et al (2009) Diffusion of scientific credits and the ranking of scientists. Phys Rev E 80(5):056103

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Radicchi F, Fortunato S, Vespignani A (2012) Citation networks. Models of Sci Dyn 233–257

  • Rapoport A, Horvath WJ (2007) A study of a large sociogram. Behav Sci 6(4):279–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ressler S (2006) Social network analysis as an approach to combat terrorism: past, present, and future research. Homel Secur Aff 2(2):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow MK (1991) The application of network analysis to criminal intelligence: an assessment of the prospects. Soc Netw 13(3):251–274

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Smith C (2013) Stepping Back from the Trees to see the Forest: Network Approaches to Valuing Intelligence. University of Virginia, Diss

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith CM, Scherer WT, Todd A, Maxwell DT (2015) Quantitative approaches to representing the value of information within the intelligence cycle. Int J Strateg Decis Sci 6(4):1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, CM, Scherer WT, Todd A (2016a) Quantitative intelligence analysis. In: Working paper

  • Smith CM, Scherer WT, Carr S (2016b) Value of information applied to networks. Environ Syst Decis 36(1):85–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Work of a Nation (2012) Central Intelligence Agency. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/additional-publications/the-work-of-a-nation. 10 Dec 2012

  • Treverton GF, Bryan Gabbard C (2008) Technical report: assessing the tradecraft of intelligence analysis. Rand Corporation. Santa Monica, CA

  • United States. Defense Science Board. Task Force on Operations Research Applications for Intelligence, Surveillance, and Technology United States. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition (2009) Report of the defense science board advisory group on defense intelligence, operations research applications for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR). Washington, D.C: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics

  • Van Glabbeek RJ, Peter Weijland W (1996) Branching time and abstraction in bisimulation semantics. J ACM (JACM) 43(3):555–600

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Van Glabbeek RJ, Smolka Scott A, Steffen B (1990) Reactive, generative, and stratified models of probabilistic processes. In: Logic in computer science, 1990. LICS’90, Proceedings, fifth annual IEEE symposium one. IEEE

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the CiteSeerX search engine for its data set provided under the CC license.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright Patterson AFB, OH, USA

    Christopher M. Smith

  2. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, 22904, USA

    William T. Scherer & Andrew Todd

Authors
  1. Christopher M. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William T. Scherer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrew Todd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher M. Smith.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Eigenvector centrality comparison analysis between citation analysis network and A and AJ,K

See Table 6.

Table 6 List of 73 author foundational author nodes with corresponding E.C. rank in A × A-Dir matrix
Full size table

Appendix 2: Comparison of group 1 and group 2 network metrics

See Tables 7 and 8.

Table 7 Comparison of network metrics for Group 1 among different networks
Full size table
Table 8 Comparison of network metrics for Group 2 among different networks
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smith, C.M., Scherer, W.T. & Todd, A. Stepping back from the trees to see the forest: a network approach to valuing intelligence. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. 6, 72 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-016-0380-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-016-0380-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation