Search

Cyber competitions are usually team activities, where team performance not only depends on the members’ abilities but also on team collaboration. This seems intuitive, especially given that team formation is a well-studied discipline in competitive sports and project management, but unfortunately, team performance and team formation strategies are rarely studied in the context of cybersecurity and cyber competitions. Since cyber competitions are becoming more prevalent and organized, this gap becomes an opportunity to formalize the study of team performance in the context of cyber competitions. This work follows a cross-validating two-approach methodology. The first is the computational modeling of cyber competitions using Agent-Based Modeling. Team members are modeled, in NetLogo, as collaborating agents competing over a network in a red team/blue team match. Members’ abilities, team interaction and network properties are parametrized (inputs), and the match score is reported as output. The second approach is grounded in the literature of team performance (not in the context of cyber competitions), where a theoretical framework is built in accordance with the literature. The results of the first approach are used to build a causal inference model using Structural Equation Modeling. Upon comparing the causal inference model to the theoretical model, they showed high resemblance, and this cross-validated both approaches. Two main findings are deduced: first, the body of literature studying teams remains valid and applicable in the context of cyber competitions. Second, coaches and researchers can test new team strategies computationally and achieve precise performance predictions. The targeted gap used methodology and findings which are novel to the study of cyber competitions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:In this paper, we propose a theoretical model based upon previous studies about personal and social network dynamics of job performance. We provide empirical support for this model using real-world data within the context of the Australian radiology profession. An examination of radiologists' professional network topology through structural-positional and relational dimensions and radiologists' personal characteristics in terms of knowledge, experience and self-esteem is provided. Thirty one breast imaging radiologists completed a purpose designed questionnaire regarding their network characteristics and personal attributes. These radiologists also independently read a test set of 60 mammographic cases: 20 cases with cancer and 40 normal cases. A Jackknife free response operating characteristic (JAFROC) method was used to measure the performance of the radiologists' in detecting breast cancers. RESULTS:Correlational analyses showed that reader performance was positively correlated with the social network variables of degree centrality and effective size, but negatively correlated with constraint and hierarchy. For personal characteristics, the number of mammograms read per year and self-esteem (self-evaluation) positively correlated with reader performance. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis indicated that the combination of number of mammograms read per year and network's effective size, hierarchy and tie strength was the best fitting model, explaining 63.4% of the variance in reader performance. The results from this study indicate the positive relationship between reading high volumes of cases by radiologists and expertise development, but also strongly emphasise the association between effective social/professional interactions and informal knowledge sharing with high performance.

A number of centrality measures are available to determine the relative importance of a node in a complex network, and betweenness is prominent among them. However, the existing centrality measures are not adequate in network percolation scenarios (such as during infection transmission in a social network of individuals, spreading of computer viruses on computer networks, or transmission of disease over a network of towns) because they do not account for the changing percolation states of individual nodes. We propose a new measure, percolation centrality, that quantifies relative impact of nodes based on their topological connectivity, as well as their percolation states. The measure can be extended to include random walk based definitions, and its computational complexity is shown to be of the same order as that of betweenness centrality. We demonstrate the usage of percolation centrality by applying it to a canonical network as well as simulated and real world scale-free and random networks.

BACKGROUND: The analysis of co-authorship network aims at exploring the impact of network structure on the outcome of scientific collaborations and research publications. However, little is known about what network properties are associated with authors who have increased number of joint publications and are being cited highly. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Measures of social network analysis, for example network centrality and tie strength, have been utilized extensively in current co-authorship literature to explore different behavioural patterns of co-authorship networks. Using three SNA measures (i.e., degree centrality, closeness centrality and betweenness centrality), we explore scientific collaboration networks to understand factors influencing performance (i.e., citation count) and formation (tie strength between authors) of such networks. A citation count is the number of times an article is cited by other articles. We use co-authorship dataset of the research field of 'steel structure' for the year 2005 to 2009. To measure the strength of scientific collaboration between two authors, we consider the number of articles co-authored by them. In this study, we examine how citation count of a scientific publication is influenced by different centrality measures of its co-author(s) in a co-authorship network. We further analyze the impact of the network positions of authors on the strength of their scientific collaborations. We use both correlation and regression methods for data analysis leading to statistical validation. We identify that citation count of a research article is positively correlated with the degree centrality and betweenness centrality values of its co-author(s). Also, we reveal that degree centrality and betweenness centrality values of authors in a co-authorship network are positively correlated with the strength of their scientific collaborations. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Authors' network positions in co-authorship networks influence the performance (i.e., citation count) and formation (i.e., tie strength) of scientific collaborations.