Unique flood-control projects
Philippine DPWH flood control & drainage
PROJECT LUNOD
Linking Underlying Networks of Overlapping Developments
A Network Science Analysis of Potential Project Overlaps in Philippine DPWH Flood-Control Projects
2016–2025PhilippinesDPWH projects
Projects with usable coordinates
Candidate relationships
High-evidence relationships
Projects participating in high-evidence relationships
Methodology at a glance
From project records to prioritized review
Candidate generation is deliberately broad. Strong evidence uses tighter, separately defined criteria.
Spatial evidence
Exact coordinate or ≤ 62.09m
Q25 is the observed strong spatial-evidence threshold. It is not the 250m candidate radius.
Textual evidence
Cosine similarity ≥ 0.826
Q90 of TF-IDF cosine similarity computed from cleaned project descriptions.
Temporal evidence
Same year OR dates overlap
Both indicators belong to one temporal dimension and can only contribute once.
0 / 3No strong evidence dimensions
1 / 3One evidence dimension
2 / 3Two evidence dimensions
3 / 3High-evidence relationship
Interactive relationship explorer
Candidate network and high-evidence subgraph
The high-evidence network is a subset of the candidate network. Click any project or relationship to inspect it.
Candidate network
Broad project-pair relationships ≤ 250m
—Nodes (Projects)—Edges (Project Pairs)—Connected Components—Largest Component (Projects)
High-evidence subgraph
Spatial AND Textual AND Temporal
—Nodes (Projects)—Edges (Relationships)—Connected Components—Largest Component (Projects)
Candidate network
Candidate Project Network
Broad project-pair relationships within the 250m candidate generation radius
Visible projects—
Visible relationships—
Exact-coordinate relationships—
Temporal-overlap relationships—
Each node is one DPWH project. Each edge is a candidate project-pair relationship in Candidate view, or a 3/3 relationship in High Evidence view. Node positions reflect network layout for readability and do not represent geographic distance.
Connected components
Direct and indirect network structure
A connected component is a group of projects linked directly or indirectly through network edges.
ABCD
A does not need a direct edge to D. If a path exists through B and C, all four projects belong to the same component. A largest component of 161 projects does not mean one project has 160 direct edges.
Largest high-evidence component
6 projects
Component 1
Loading actual Contract IDs…
— relationships— exact-coordinate— temporal-overlap
High-evidence subgraph
Component browser
Geographic context
Reported project coordinates
Reported coordinates are DPWH reference coordinates and may require independent validation. Network layout ≠ geographic map position.
Project explorer
Find an individual Contract ID
Project review status is a node-level classification. It is separate from the X/3 evidence profile of any project pair.
Enter at least two characters to search 27,909 project records.
About & interpretation
Evidence for review prioritization
Project LUNOD supports transparent triage and detailed comparison. It does not make legal, audit, or investigative findings.
Broad search result
A project pair generated within 250m. It may contain zero, one, two, or three strong evidence dimensions.
All three dimensions
A candidate relationship satisfying Spatial AND Textual AND Temporal criteria. It still warrants review rather than a presumption.
Informative, not additive
Same contractor, office, region, exact coordinates, and sequential timing give context but never increase the primary count above 3.
Direct relationships
Candidate Degree and High-Evidence Degree count a project’s direct network relationships in their respective graphs.
Potential overlap ≠ confirmed duplicate.High-Evidence Relationship ≠ wrongdoing.Independent validation remains essential.