Fundamental limits to identifying node and tie memory in temporal networks: marginal artefacts and spreading dynamics

Abstract

Temporal-network models attribute memory in contact data to either node self-excitation (branching ratio n_node) or tie reinforcement (kappa), carrying major consequences for epidemic spreading. We prove that when event initiators are observed, the two mechanisms are orthogonal: the Fisher information is block-diagonal and neither trades off against the other. In undirected proximity data, where initiators are unobserved, marginalising over them couples the mechanisms into a structural confound that survives posterior smoothing. On empirical proximity, messaging, and email records, however, a cruder failure dominates: fitted node memory is pinned to the inter-event marginal law and remains virtually invariant across latent label posterior samples (coefficient of variation below 1%). An inter-event-order shuffle test and burstiness-memory diagnostics reveal that exponential-Hawkes node memory is recovered from none, while tie reinforcement remains identifiable throughout. This near-unidentifiability is intrinsic, not an artefact of the exponential kernel: refitting flexible scale-free (sum-of-exponentials) kernels on synthetic power-law self-exciting processes fails to distinguish genuine node memory from memoryless renewal controls, with identical collapses recurring on algorithmic networks (edit bots, cloud microservices) and cortical spiking. Downstream epidemic consequences are quantitative: simulations fitted to empirical contact records under-predict outbreak sizes by up to a factor of 2.5 and shift the epidemic threshold. We conclude that observational temporal networks face a two-fold identifiability boundary: contact directionality is essential to decouple tie reinforcement, whereas heavy-tailed node self-excitation is intrinsically unidentifiable from contact timings alone.