Introduction
C
omplex networks are currently being studied across
many fields of science [1-3]. Undoubtedly, many
systems in nature can be described by models of
complex networks, which are structures consisting of
nodes or vertices connected by links or edges. Examples
are numerous. The Internet is a network of routers or
domains. The World Wide Web (WWW) is a network of
websites (Fig. 1). The brain is a network of neu-
rons. An organization is a network of people.
The global economy is a network of national
economies, which are themselves networks of
markets; and markets are themselves networks
of interacting producers and consumers. Food
webs and metabolic pathways can all be repre-
sented by networks, as can the relationships
among words in a language, topics in a conver-
sation, and even strategies for solving a mathe-
matical problem. Moreover, diseases are
transmitted through social networks; and com-
puter viruses occasionally spread through the
Internet. Energy is distributed through trans-
portation networks, both in living organisms,
man-made infrastructures, and in many physical
systems such as the power grids. Figures 2-4 are
artistic drawings that help visualize the com-
plexities of some typical real-world networks.
The ubiquity of complex networks in sci-
ence and technology has naturally led to a set
of common and important research problems
concerning how the network structure facili-
tates and constrains the network dynamical
behaviors, which have largely been neglected
in the studies of traditional disciplines. For
example, how do social networks mediate the
transmission of a disease? How do cascading
failures propagate throughout a large power
transmission grid or a global financial network?
What is the most efficient and robust architecture for a
particular organization or an artifact under a changing
and uncertain environment? Problems of this kind are
confronting us everyday, problems which demand
answers and solutions.
For over a century, modeling of physical as well as
non-physical systems and processes has been performed
under an implicit assumption that the interaction pat-
terns among the individuals of the underlying system or
process can be embedded onto a regular and perhaps
universal structure such as a Euclidean lattice. In late
1950s, two mathematicians, Erdös and Rényi (ER), made
a breakthrough in the classical mathematical graph theo-
ry. They described a network with complex topology by a
random graph [4]. Their work had laid a foundation of the
random network theory, followed by intensive studies in
the next 40 years and even today. Although intuition
clearly indicates that many real-life complex networks are
neither completely regular nor completely random, the
ER random graph model was the only sensible and rigor-
ous approach that dominated scientists’ thinking about
complex networks for nearly half of a century, due essen-
tially to the absence of super-computational power and
detailed topological information about very large-scale
real-world networks.
In the past few years, the computerization of data
acquisition and the availability of high computing power
have led to the emergence of huge databases on various
real networks of complex topology. The public access to
the huge amount of real data has in turn stimulated great
interest in trying to uncover the generic properties of dif-
ferent kinds of complex networks. In this endeavor, two
7
Xiao Fan Wang is with the Department of Automation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200030, P. R. China. Email: xfwang@sjtu.edu.cn.
Guanrong (Ron) Chen is with the Department of Electronic Engineering and director of the Centre for Chaos Control and Synchronization, City
University of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, P. R. China. Email: gchen@ee.cityu.edu.hk.
FIRST QUARTER 2003 IEEE CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS MAGAZINE