logo Netzschleuder network catalog, repository, and centrifuge

email_enron — Email network (Enron corpus)

Description

An email communication network from the Enron corporation, covering around half a million emails, as compiled by J. Leskovec and collaborators from the Enron email corpus. The corpus consists of the emails of about 150 Enron employees, mostly senior management, which were made public by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission during its investigation of the company's collapse, and were cleaned and released for research by B. Klimt and Y. Yang (CMU). Nodes are email addresses, and an undirected edge connects two addresses if at least one email was sent from one to the other (in either direction). Addresses outside Enron are also present, but only their communication with Enron addresses is observed. Nodes are identified only by numeric identifiers, and the network has no node or edge properties.

Tags
Social Communication Unweighted
Added
2020-08-11
Citation
  • B. Klimt and Y. Yang, "The Enron Corpus: A New Dataset for Email Classification Research." Proc. Eur. Conf. Machine Learning (ECML), 217-226 (2004). 10.1007/978-3-540-30115-8_22 Sci-Hub
Upstream URL OK
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30115-8_22
Networks
Tip: hover over a column header for a description.
Column legend
$\left<k\right>$
Mean degree
$\sigma_k$
Standard deviation of the degrees
$\lambda_h$
Largest eigenvalue of the Hashimoto (non-backtracking) matrix
$\tau$
Random walk mixing time
$r$
Degree assortativity
$c$
Global clustering coefficient
$\oslash$
(Pseudo-) diameter
$S$
Relative size of the largest component
NPs
Node properties
EPs
Edge properties
Name Nodes Edges $\left<k\right>$ $\sigma_k$ $\lambda_h$ $\tau$ $r$ $c$ $\oslash$ $S$ Kind Mode NPs EPs gt GraphML GML csv
email_enron 36,692 367,662 10.02 72.20 115.48 283.03 -0.11 0.09 13 0.92 Directed Unipartite 1023 KiB 1.9 MiB 1.9 MiB 1.6 MiB
Ridiculograms*
* These are automatically generated force-directed visualizations, and can be quite meaningless for networks both big and small. They should not be taken seriously as sources of scientific insight. See here for a discussion.