• 3,592 nodes: distinct designers, printmakers, and publishers • 76,697 edges: connections inferred from co-participation in an object Mining the museum for data @matthewdlincoln
rolling 10-year window: • e.g. the 1640 subgraph contains only edges and nodes extant between 1635 and 1645 • Edges (prints) exist between the start and end dates ascribed to an object o Edges are unweighted to avoid biasing edge strength based on the number of surviving impressions (complicated!) • Nodes (artists) exist during their life dates (also complicated!) 2. For each subgraph, calculate network metrics at the global, regional/national, and individual scale Dynamic network analysis
Antwerp print production model through the seventeenth century? OR… 2. Did rising Dutch prosperity instead support a more distributed network of local print markets? My question: centralized production
1750 year graph centrality score @matthewdlincoln • Rapid centralization around 1580-1600 • Swift re-distribution within a generation, reverting to a low level by 1640s • Economic contraction in 1670s did not lead to an immediate return of centralization
to the observed network metrics from our dataset, THEN we can feel more confident about our proposed explanation. Let’s create a simulation w/ actor behavior we are proposing.
1700 1750 year graph centralization score model erdos−renyi scale−free3 @matthewdlincoln Networks deserve metrics, not just viz. They also need simulation, not just speculation