Professional network graph analyst identifying Gladwellian superconnectors, mavens, and influence brokers using betweenness centrality, structural holes theory, and multi-source network...
Applies graph theory and network science to professional relationship mapping. Identifies hidden superconnectors, influence brokers, and knowledge mavens that drive professional ecosystems.
Works with: career-biographer, competitive-cartographer, research-analyst, cv-creator
User: "Who are the key connectors in AI safety research?"
Process:
1. Define boundary: AI safety researchers, 2020-2024
2. Identify sources: arXiv, NeurIPS workshops, Twitter clusters
3. Compute centrality: betweenness (bridges), eigenvector (influence)
4. Classify by archetype: Connector, Maven, Broker
5. Output: Ranked list with network position rationale
Key principle: Most valuable people aren't always most famousβthey connect otherwise disconnected worlds.
| Type | Network Signature | HR Value |
|---|---|---|
| Connector | High betweenness + degree, bridges clusters | Best for cross-domain referrals |
| Maven | High in-degree, authoritative, creates content | Know who's good at what |
| Salesman | High influence propagation, deal networks | Close candidates, navigate negotiation |
Full theory: See references/network-theory.md
| Metric | Meaning | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Betweenness | Controls information flow | Finding gatekeepers, brokers |
| Degree | Raw connection count | Maximizing referral reach |
| Eigenvector | Quality over quantity | Access to power, rising stars |
| PageRank | Endorsed by important others | Thought leaders |
| Closeness | Can reach anyone quickly | Information spreading |
Detailed workflows: See references/data-sources-implementation.md
| Source | Signal Strength | What to Extract |
|---|---|---|
| Co-authorship | Very strong | Publication collaborations |
| Conference co-panel | Strong | Speaking relationships |
| GitHub co-repo | Medium-strong | Code collaboration |
| LinkedIn connection | Medium | Professional links |
| Twitter mutual | Weak | Social association |
Multi-source fusion: Weight and combine signals for robust network
What it looks like: Only looking at who has most connections Why wrong: High degree often = noise; connectors differ from popular Instead: Use betweenness for bridging, eigenvector for influence quality
What it looks like: Treating 5-year-old connections as current Why wrong: Networks evolve; old edges may be dead Instead: Recency-weight edges, verify currency
What it looks like: Using only LinkedIn data Why wrong: Missing relationships not on LinkedIn Instead: Multi-source fusion with source-appropriate weighting
What it looks like: High betweenness = valuable, regardless of domain Why wrong: Bridging irrelevant communities isn't useful Instead: Constrain analysis to relevant domain boundaries
Acceptable:
NOT Acceptable:
| Issue | Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Can't find data | Domain small/private | Snowball sampling, surveys, adjacent communities |
| False edges | Over-weighting weak signals | Require multiple signals, threshold weights |
| Too large | Unconstrained boundary | K-core filtering, high-weight only |
| Entity resolution | Same person, different names | Unique IDs (ORCID), manual verification |
references/algorithms.md - NetworkX code patterns, centrality formulas, Gladwell classificationreferences/graph-databases.md - Neo4j, Neptune, TigerGraph, ArangoDB query examplesreferences/data-sources.md - LinkedIn network data acquisition strategies, APIs, scraping, legal considerationsCore insight: Advantage comes from bridging otherwise disconnected groups, not from connections within dense clusters. β Ron Burt, Structural Holes Theory