David Sowder (Zothar) wrote: > Is there more than one metric for which we are trying to achieve "small > world"? If so, could that be confusing things for others as well?
Yup, there are two ways to define a small world: 1) The average number of hops between any two nodes is low and the probability that two neighbours of a given node are neighbours is high. 2) Every node has a location, and the probability that any two nodes are neighbours is proportional to 1/(r^d), where r is the distance between the nodes and d is the number of dimensions. Graphs that fit the second definition generally fit the first definition, but not necessarily vice versa. Freenet uses the second definition, with d=1. > Can a given node and a list of potential peers be used to create a small > world model, at least from the perspective of the given node? Yes, this is what swapping does: given an arbitrary graph, it changes the locations of the nodes to fit the second definition above, without making or breaking any connections. > Could refbot.py potentially say, add 50 peers and then remove (in an > orderly fashion) all but 15 based on a small world location/distance > distribution to achieve a small world model if say, all/most nodes were > using this same algorithm? It's possible, but I'm not sure it's necessary - the locations are arbitrary, so rather than adding and removing connections you could just change the locations. Cheers, Michael
