Network Profile
Overall Strength
28.30%
of network
(30.97M)
Influence Score
8.76%
of network
(14.933387)
Direct Connections
11
Node & Network Strength Details
How is this calculated? The math continuously tracks how strongly this post is connected to the rest of the website.
Every tag forms a network link. The pie charts below show each connected post's base strength (PV) and influence (IV) as a share of this post's direct neighbourhood.
// 1. Base variables (minimum value of 1 to prevent zero-multiplication issues)
Outbound ($in) = max(1, 6) =
6
Inbound ($out) = max(1, 5) =
5
// 2. Node Base Values
Base Strength (PV) = $in × $out = 6 × 5 =
30
Base Influence (IV) = $in ÷ $out = 6 ÷ 5 =
1.2
// 3. Network Exponential Values (accumulating 9 direct neighbours)
Network Strength (CV) = Node PV × (Π Neighbour PVs) =
30.97M
Network Influence (TV) = Node IV × (Π Neighbour IVs) =
14.933387
Outbound
6
Tags on post
Inbound
5
Posts tagging this
Base Node Strength
30
Base Node Influence
1.2
Connected Nodes
9
Strength Share (vs Direct Neighbours)
- This Post (28.30%)
- Romaleon (11.32%)
- Platepistoma guezei (3.77%)
- Platepistoma kiribatiense (3.77%)
- Platepistoma nanum (3.77%)
- Platepistoma seychellense (3.77%)
- Anatolikos (1.89%)
- Lobocarcininae (1.89%)
- Unidentified Cancridae (1.89%)
Dominant nodes (excluded from chart)Metacarcinus 39.62%
Influence Share (vs Direct Neighbours)
8.76%
(14.933387 overall)
- This Post (8.76%)
- Anatolikos (14.60%)
- Lobocarcininae (14.60%)
- Unidentified Cancridae (14.60%)
- Romaleon (9.73%)
- Metacarcinus (8.52%)
- Platepistoma guezei (7.30%)
- Platepistoma kiribatiense (7.30%)
- Platepistoma nanum (7.30%)
- Platepistoma seychellense (7.30%)
Connected Network (How neighbours affect this node)
Top Network Boosters (Highest Multipliers)
Weakest Connections (Lowest Multipliers)
Connection Health Audit (Red = broken 1-way link)
Last calculated math cycle: May 4, 10:50 PM
Analyzing Network Connections...
👁️ 4 Views