- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review E

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

River networks in the framework of complex network theory

A. Sanchirico1 and M. Fiorentino2

PDF

Phys. Rev. E 112, 014307 – Published 9 July, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/kpbq-8wzb

Abstract

This study aims to conceptualize natural drainage networks as genuine complex networks. To overcome the limitation imposed by the regular connectivity structure of the traditional planted binary tree model—commonly employed to represent the planar configuration of fluvial systems—we introduce a line graph transformation. This mapping converts a planted binary tree into a plane tree, which can be regarded as a special class of loopless, directed graph characterized by inhomogeneous topology. From a geomorphological standpoint, our transformation naturally induces a hierarchical basin ordering that reflects the pioneering Gravelius stream order, offering insights into this scheme by projecting the hierarchy of tributary rivers onto a purely topological space. The application of complex network theory provides an explanatory perspective on river networks, yielding experimental findings that complement and extend established results in the geomorphological literature. In particular, our analysis of six catchments in southern Italy reveals previously unrecognized regularities, including a family of exact scaling laws and a surprisingly smooth width-type function that closely fits a Gamma distribution. These scaling laws emerge as power-law probability distributions for both the in-degree of nodes and the size of their in-components, which capture the scale invariance of tributary river lengths and drainage areas in tributary basins, respectively, thereby expanding the pantheon of known fluvial laws. Notably, these distributions represent sample distributions drawn from the complete populations of upstream lengths and drainage areas, with the sampling induced by our mapping through the selection of fluvial quantities corresponding to topologically well-defined elements of the plane tree. On the theoretical front, our approach is grounded in a model of directed, uncorrelated random graphs with arbitrary degree distributions. Among other things, by applying the generating function formalism to uncorrelated plane trees we derive an analytical expression for the distribution of drainage areas in tributary basins as a function of the distribution of tributary river lengths. By relying on average cluster properties, we predict the scaling exponent of the former distribution to be exactly 2 in the limit of large system sizes—a result that aligns well with both our empirical observations and previous findings in the complex network literature. Beyond the first-order approximation inherent in the model, our mapping also offers a coherent framework for interpreting the correlation structure consistently observed across all examined drainage networks.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (77)

  1. R. Albert and A.-L. Barabási, Statistical mechanics of complex networks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 47 (2002); S. N. Dorogovtsev and J. F. F. Mendes, Evolution of networks, Adv. Phys. 51, 1079 (2002); M. E. J. Newman, The structure and function of complex networks, SIAM Rev. 45, 167 (2003); Networks: An Introduction, 2nd ed. (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018).
  2. B. Bollobás, Random Graphs (Academic Press, London, 1985).
  3. M. E. J. Newman, S. H. Strogatz, and D. J. Watts, Random graphs with arbitrary degree distribution and their applications, Phys. Rev. E 64, 026118 (2001).
  4. A.-L. Barabási and R. Albert, Emergence of scaling on random networks, Science 286, 509 (1999); L. A. N. Amaral, A. Scala, M. Barthélémy, and H. E. Stanley, Classes of small-world networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 11149 (2000); I. Voitalov, P. van der Hoorn, R. van der Hofstad, and D. Krioukov, Scale-free networks well done, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033034 (2019).
  5. J. G. Forster, D. V. Foster, P. Grassberger, and M. Paczuski, Edge direction and the structure of networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 10815 (2010).
  6. S. Maslov and K. Sneppen, Specificity and stability in topology of protein networks, Science 296, 910 (2002).
  7. S. Maslov, K. Sneppen, and A. Zaliznyak, Detection of topological patterns in complex networks: Correlation profile of the Internet, Physica A 333, 529 (2004).
  8. R. Pastor-Satorras, R. Vázquez, and A. Vespignani, Dynamical and correlation properties of the Internet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 258701 (2001).
  9. A. Vazquez, R. Pastor-Satorras, and A. Vespignani, Large-scale topological and dynamical properties of the Internet, Phys. Rev. E 65, 066130 (2002).
  10. M. E. J. Newman, Assortative mixing in networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 208701 (2002).
  11. M. E. J. Newman, Mixing patterns in networks, Phys. Rev. E 67, 026126 (2003).
  12. S. N. Dorogovtsev, J. F. F. Mendes, and A. N. Samukhin, Giant strongly connected component of directed networks, Phys. Rev. E 64, 025101(R) (2001); N. Schwartz, R. Cohen, D. ben-Avraham, A.-L. Barabási, and S. Havlin, Percolation in directed scale-free networks, ibid. 66, 015104(R) (2002); I. Kryven, Emergence of the giant weak-component in directed random graphs with arbitrary degree distributions, ibid. 94, 012315 (2016).
  13. M. Boguñá and M. A. Serrano, Generalized percolation in random directed networks, Phys. Rev. E 72, 016106 (2005).
  14. G. Caldarelli, R. Marchetti, and L. Pietronero, The fractal properties of Internet, Eur. Phys. Lett. 52, 386 (2000).
  15. A. Arenas, L. Danon, A. Díaz-Guilera, P. M. Gleiser, and R. Guimerà, Community analysis in social networks, Eur. Phys. J. B 38, 373 (2004).
  16. F. Radicchi, C. Castellano, F. Cecconi, V. Loreto, and D. Parisi, Defining and identifying communities in networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101, 2658 (2004).
  17. G. Caldarelli, C. C. Cartozo, P. De Los Rios, and V. D. P. Servedio, Widespread occurrence of the inverse square distribution in social sciences and taxonomy, Phys. Rev. E 69, 035101(R) (2004).
  18. P. L. Krapivsky and S. Redner, Organization of growing random networks, Phys. Rev. E 63, 066123 (2001).
  19. P. De Los Rios, Power-law size distribution of supercritical random trees, Europhys. Lett. 56, 898 (2001).
  20. K. Paik and P. Kumar, Inevitable self-similar topology of binary trees and their diverse hierarchical density, Eur. Phys. J. B 60, 247 (2007).
  21. Using a growing network model, a similar quantity was first introduced in Ref. [18], where the authors studied a time-dependent directed network. In the context of the present study, this corresponds to a plane tree with the root as the oldest ancestor node. Excluding the root, the authors referred to the fraction of vertices with total degree k+1 that attach to vertices with total degree h+1, out of a total of n−1 nodes. In Ref. [22], this definition was extended to undirected graphs, leading to the so-called matrix of connections, which is symmetric in its indices. The elements of this matrix represent the number of edges connecting a vertex of degree k to one of degree h when h≠k, and twice the number of edges between vertices within the same degree class when h=k (see also Ref. [23]). Finally, a related quantity was introduced in Refs. [10, 11], defined in terms of the excess degree of vertices, which is one less than the vertex degree itself.
  22. D. S. Callaway, J. E. Hopcroft, J. M. Kleinberg, M. E. J. Newman, and S. H. Strogatz, Are randomly grown graphs really random? Phys. Rev. E 64, 041902 (2001).
  23. M. Boguá and R. Pastor-Satorras, Epidemic spreading in correlated complex networks, Phys. Rev. E 66, 047104 (2002); M. Boguñá, R. Pastor-Satorras, and A. Vespignani, Epidemic spreading in complex networks with degree correlations, in Statistical Mechanics of Complex Networks, Lecture Notes in Physics, edited by R. Pastor-Satorras, M. Rubi, and A. Diaz-Guilera (Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2003), Vol. 625, pp. 127–147.
  24. D. S. Callaway, M. E. J. Newman, S. H. Strogatz, and D. J. Watts, Network robustness and fragility: Percolation on random graphs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5468 (2000); R. Albert, H. Jeong, and A.-L. Barabási, Error and attack tolerance of complex networks, Nature (London) 406, 378 (2000); R. Cohen, K. Erez, D. ben-Avraham, and S. Havlin, Resilience of the Internet to random breakdowns, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4626 (2000); Breakdown of the Internet under intentional attack, 86, 3682 (2001); R. Pastor-Satorras and A. Vespignani, Epidemic spreading in scale-free networks, ibid. 86, 3200 (2001); Epidemic dynamics and endemic states in complex networks, Phys. Rev. E 63, 066117 (2001); M. E. J. Newman, Spread of epidemic disease on networks, ibid. 66, 016128 (2002); L. K. Gallos, R. Cohen, P. Argyrakis, A. Bunde, and S. Havlin, Stability and topology of scale-free networks under attack and defense strategies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 188701 (2005).
  25. V. M. Eguíluz and K. Klemm, Epidemic threshold in structured scale-free networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 108701 (2002); A. Vázquez and Y. Moreno, Resilience to damage of graphs with degree correlations, Phys. Rev. E 67, 015101(R) (2003).
  26. A. V. Goltsev, S. N. Dorogovtsev, and J. F. F. Mendes, Percolation on correlated networks, Phys. Rev. E 78, 051105 (2008).
  27. C. M. Schneider, A. A. Moreira, J. S. Andrade, S. Havlin, and H. J. Herrmann, Mitigation of malicious attacks on networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 3838 (2011); Tanizawa, S. Havlin, and H. E. Stanley, Robustness of onionlike correlated networks against targeted attacks, Phys. Rev. E 85, 046109 (2012).
  28. S. N. Dorogovtsev, A. V. Goltsev, and J. F. F. Mendes, Critical phenomena in complex networks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1275 (2008).
  29. R. Pastor-Satorras, C. Castellano, P. Van Mieghem, and A. Vespignani, Epidemic processes in complex networks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 925 (2015).
  30. R. P. Stanley, Enumerative Combinatorics, Vol. 2 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).
  31. Upon removal of its root node, a planted binary tree reduces to a binary tree.
  32. A. Rinaldo, J. E. Banavar, and A. Maritan, Tree, networks, and hydrology, Water Resour. Res. 42, W06D07 (2006).
  33. I. Rodríguez-Iturbe, E. Ijjász-Vasquez, R. L. Bras, and D. G. Tarboton, Power law distribution of discharge mass and energy in river basins, Water Resour. Res. 28, 1089 (1992).
  34. A. Maritan, A. Rinaldo, R. Rigon, A. Giacometti, and I. Rodríguez-Iturbe, Scaling laws for river networks, Phys. Rev. E 53, 1510 (1996).
  35. A. Rinaldo, R. Rigon, J. R. Banavar, A. Maritan, and I. Rodríguez-Iturbe, Evolution and selection of river networks: Statistics, dynamics, and complexity, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 2417 (2014).
  36. R. Rigon, I. Rodríguez-Iturbe, A. Maritan, A. Giacometti, D. G. Tarboton, and A. Rinaldo, On Hack's law, Water Resour. Res. 32, 3367 (1996).
  37. J. T. Hack, Studies of longitudinal stream profiles in Virginia and Maryland, U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap. No. 294-B (USGS Publications Warehouse, 1957), p. 45.
  38. I. Rodríguez-Iturbe and A. Rinaldo, Fractal River Basins: Change and Self-Organization (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997).
  39. Originally discovered by Hack trough analysis of distinct, nonoverlapping basins—specifically referring to the length of their longest stream—this relationship is now also recognized as valid with respect to main stream lengths, as well as for subbasins embedded within a larger catchment, regardless of whether they are nested or not [34, 36, 40].
  40. P. S. Dodds and D. H. Rothman, Unified view of scaling laws for river networks, Phys. Rev. E 59, 4865 (1999).
  41. D. M. Gray, Interrelationships of watershed characteristics, J. Geophys. Res. 66, 1215 (1961).
  42. G. Willgoose, R. L. Bras, and I. Rodríguez-Iturbe, A coupled channel network growth and hillslope evolution model: 1. Theory, Water Resour. Res. 27, 1671 (1991); A. D. Howard, A detachment-limited model of drainage basin evolution, ibid. 30, 2261 (1994); G. E. Tucker and R. L. Bras, Hillslope processes, drainage density, and landscape morphology, ibid. 34, 2751 (1998); S. Kramer and M. Marder, Evolution of river networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 205 (1992); R. L. Leheny and S. R. Nager, Model for the evolution of river networks, ibid. 71, 1470 (1993); J. R. Banavar, F. Colaiori, A. Flammini, A. Giacometti, A. Maritan, and A. Rinaldo, Sculpting of a fractal river basin, ibid. 78, 4522 (1997); E. Somfai and L. M. Sander, Scaling and river networks: A Landau theory for erosion, Phys. Rev. E 56, R5(R) (1997).
  43. J. R. Banavar, F. Colaiori, A. Flammini, A. Maritan, and A. Rinaldo, Scaling, optimality and landscape evolution, J. Stat. Phys. 104, 1 (2001).
  44. I. Rodríguez-Iturbe, A. Rinaldo, R. Rigon, R. L. Bras, and E. Ijjasz-Vasquez, Energy dissipation, runoff production and the three-dimensional structure of channel networks, Water Resour. Res. 28, 1095 (1992); A. Rinaldo, I. Rodríguez-Iturbe, R. Rigon, R. L. Bras, E. Ijjasz-Vasquez, and A. Marani, Minimum energy and fractal structures of drainage networks, ibid. 28, 2183 (1992).
  45. R. Rigon, A. Rinaldo, I. Rodríguez-Iturbe, R. L. Bras, and E. Ijjasz-Vasquez, Optimal channel networks: A framework for the study of river basin morphology, Water Resour. Res. 29, 1635 (1993).
  46. R. E. Horton, Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology, Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 56, 275 (1945); A. N. Strahler, Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology, Eos Transactions American Geophysical Union 38, 913 (1957).
  47. M. A. Melton, A derivation of Strahler's channel-ordering system, J. Geol. 67, 345 (1959).
  48. R. L. Shreve, Statistical law of stream number, J. Geol. 74, 17 (1966); Infinite topologically random channel networks, 75, 178 (1967).
  49. B. M. Troutman and M. B. Karlinger, On the expected width function for topologically random channel networks, J. Appl. Prob. 21, 836 (1984).
  50. O. J. Mesa and V. K. Gupta, On the main channel length-area relationship for channel networks, Water Resour. Res. 23, 2119 (1987); M. Fiorentino, P. Claps, and V. P. Singh, An entropy-based morphological analysis of river basin networks, ibid. 29, 1215 (1993); P. Claps, M. Fiorentino, and G. Oliveto, Informational entropy of fractal river networks, J. Hydrol. 187, 145 (1996).
  51. A. Marani, R. Rigon, and A. Rinaldo, A note on fractal channel networks, Water Resour. Res. 27, 3041 (1991).
  52. P. S. Dodds and D. H. Rothman, Geometry of river networks. I. Scaling, fluctuations and deviations, Phys. Rev. E 63, 016115 (2000); Geometry of river networks. II. Distributions of component size and number, 63, 016116 (2000); Geometry of river networks. III. Characterization of component connectivity, 63, 016117 (2000).
  53. F. Harray, Graph Theory (Addison-Wesley, Boston, 1969).
  54. M. Molloy and B. Reed, A critical point for random graphs with a given degree sequence, Random Struc. Algor. 6, 161 (1995); The size of the giant component of a random graph with a given degree sequence, Comb. Probab. Comput. 7, 295 (1998).
  55. P. Erdős and A. Rényi, On random graphs, Publ. Math. 6, 290 (1959); On the evolution of random graphs, Publ. Math. Inst. Hungar. Acad. Sci. 5, 17 (1960); On the strength of connectedness of a random graph, Acta Math. Scientia Hungary 12, 261 (1964).
  56. H. Gravelius, Morphometry of Drainage Basins (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1914).
  57. T. E. Harris, The Theory of Branching Processes (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1963).
  58. M. Marani, A. Rinaldo, R. Rigon, and I. Rodriguez-Iturbe, Geomorphological width functions and the random cascade, Geophys. Res. Lett. 21, 2123 (1994).
  59. B. M. Troutman and M. R. Karlinger, Unit hydrograph approximations assuming linear flow through topologically random channel networks, Water Resour. Res. 21, 743 (1985); M. R. Karlinger and B. M. Troutman, Assessment of the instantaneous unit hydrograph derived from the theory of topologically random networks, ibid. 21, 1693 (1985); V. K. Gupta and O. Mesa, Runoff generation and hydrologic response via channel network geomorphology—Recent progress and open problems, J. Hydrol. 102, 3 (1988).
  60. R. Guimerà, L. Danon, A. Díaz-Guilera, F. Giralt, and A. Arenas, Self-similar community structure in a network of human interactions, Phys. Rev. E 68, 065103(R) (2003).
  61. B. Jiang and C. Claramunt, Topological analysis of urban street networks, Environ. Plan. B 31, 151 (2004); S. Porta, P. Crucitti, and V. Latora, The network analysis of urban streets: A dual approach, Physica A 369, 853 (2006); P. Crucitti, V. Latora, and S. Porta, Centrality in networks of urban street, Chaos 16, 015113 (2006).
  62. The digital terrain model is available at http://rsdi.regione.basilicata.it/Catalogo/srv/ita/search?hl=ita/#_.
  63. M. Neteler and H. Mitasova, Open Source GIS: A GRASS GIS Approach (Springer, New York, 2008).
  64. M. E. J. Newman, Component sizes in networks with arbitrary degree distributions, Phys. Rev. E 76, 045101(R) (2007).
  65. This explanation was first proposed in Ref. [20], where the authors noted that the sharpest cutoff occurs in a critical binary tree, in which only one node bifurcates at each topological level. In this case, the repetition of a single internal node and one leaf results in a constant increase in the subtree size.
  66. J. E. Nash, A unit hydrograph study, with particular reference to British catchments, Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 17, 249 (1960).
  67. Equations (33) and (34) were derived in Ref. [3] under the key assumption that the network is locally tree-like; that is, all finite connected clusters of vertices contain no short loops of edges. By definition, this condition is trivially satisfied by any tree.
  68. A perfect i-ary tree is a specific type of plane tree where all leaves are situated at the same level, and every internal node has exactly i children.
  69. J. S. Kim, K.-I. Goh, G. Salvi, E. Oh, B. Kahng, and D. Kim, Fractality in complex networks: Critical and supercritical skeletons, Phys. Rev. E 75, 016110 (2007).
  70. More precisely, the average branching ratio was defined in Ref. [69] as the mean in-degree of the vertices. However, for a constant branching ratio, it can be easily shown that 〈i〉p=〈i〉q, where both averages exclude the leaf nodes at the maximum level. In this paper, to align with the standard formalism from graph theory used in Ref. [3], we define the average branching ratio in terms of the in-degree distribution of the source nodes of an edge, rather than the in-degree distribution of the vertices themselves.
  71. I. Kryven, General expression for the component size distribution in infinite configuration networks, Phys. Rev. E 95, 052303 (2017).
  72. M. E. J. Newman, Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law, Contemp. Phys. 46, 323 (2005).
  73. The Pearson coefficient introduced in Ref. [5] generalizes the version originally proposed in Ref. [22] for undirected networks and later modified in Ref. [10] in terms of the joint distribution of the excess degrees of the two vertices at either end of a randomly chosen edge. The first extension to directed graphs was presented in Ref. [11], where the correlation measure was defined with respect to the excess out- and in-degrees of the source and target nodes, respectively, for a given edge.
  74. M. E. J. Newman and J. Park, Why social networks are different from other types of networks, Phys. Rev. E 68, 036122 (2003).
  75. A similar quantity was introduced in Ref. [13] in terms of the out- and in-degrees of the source and target nodes of a given edge, respectively. Referring to the notation used in the present paper, Eq. (4) in Ref. [13] can be written as r̂krh|k=rhr̂k|h. In contrast, in our case, the detailed balance condition gives qkrh|k=rhqk|h. The analogous quantity for undirected graphs was discussed in Refs. [8, 9, 25, 26], and [23].
  76. A similar result was obtained for random branching trees in Ref. [14].
  77. A perfect 2-ary tree (referred to as a perfect binary tree in Ref. [20]) is a binary tree in which all leaves are situated at the same level.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. E 112, 014307– Published 9 July, 2025
  • Received 26 November 2024
  • Revised 14 May 2025
  • Accepted 5 June 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation