Graph Neural Networks for Modeling Reciprocity Relationships in Industrial Capacity Sharing Networks
Keywords:
graph neural networks, reciprocity, capacity sharing, industrial networks, socio-technical systems, fairness, governanceAbstract
Industrial capacity sharing has emerged as a strategic mechanism for firms to manage demand volatility, reduce capital expenditure, and enhance resource utilization across supply chains. The dynamics of such networks, however, depend critically on reciprocity relationships that extend beyond simple transactional exchanges and encompass trust, long-term mutual obligations, and strategic interdependence. This paper presents a system-level investigation into the use of graph neural networks for modeling these complex reciprocity patterns in industrial capacity sharing networks. We argue that graph neural networks offer a uniquely expressive computational substrate capable of capturing the multi-relational, temporally evolving, and context-dependent nature of reciprocal ties among firms. The discussion foregrounds the structural trade-offs involved in designing graph-based learning architectures for industrial settings, including the tension between expressive power and computational tractability, the need to incorporate heterogeneous firm attributes, and the challenge of aligning learned representations with operational governance mechanisms. Through detailed analysis, we explore how graph neural network models can be deployed to support fairness-aware resource allocation, early warning systems for reciprocity breakdown, and adaptive capacity pricing. We further examine critical deployment considerations, including data sovereignty, interoperability with legacy enterprise systems, and the long-term sustainability of data-driven reciprocity governance. Policy implications concerning algorithmic transparency, anti-trust considerations, and the reinforcement of cooperative norms are systematically addressed. The paper contributes a holistic framework that bridges machine learning research with the socio-technical realities of industrial ecosystems, offering a forward-looking perspective on the design of intelligent infrastructure for the circular and sharing economy.
References
1. Bronstein, M. M., Bruna, J., LeCun, Y., Szlam, A., & Vandergheynst, P. (2017). Geometric deep learning: Going beyond Euclidean data. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 34(4), 18–42.
2. Kipf, T. N., & Welling, M. (2017). Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations.
3. Veličković, P., Cucurull, G., Casanova, A., Romero, A., Lio, P., & Bengio, Y. (2018). Graph attention networks. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations.
4. Hamilton, W. L., Ying, R., & Leskovec, J. (2017). Inductive representation learning on large graphs. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 1024–1034.
5. Schlichtkrull, M., Kipf, T. N., Bloem, P., van den Berg, R., Titov, I., & Welling, M. (2018). Modeling relational data with graph convolutional networks. Proceedings of the European Semantic Web Conference, 593–607.
6. Wu, Z., Pan, S., Chen, F., Long, G., Zhang, C., & Yu, P. S. (2021). A comprehensive survey on graph neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 32(1), 4–24.
7. Chen, J., Ma, T., & Xiao, C. (2018). FastGCN: Fast learning with graph convolutional networks via importance sampling. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations.
8. Battaglia, P. W., Hamrick, J. B., Bapst, V., Sanchez-Gonzalez, A., Zambaldi, V., Malinowski, M., ... & Pascanu, R. (2018). Relational inductive biases, deep learning, and graph networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.01261.
9. Nowak, M. A., & Sigmund, K. (2005). Evolution of indirect reciprocity. Nature, 437(7063), 1291–1298.
10. Hu, X., & Caldentey, R. (2023). Trust and reciprocity in firms’ capacity sharing. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 25(4), 1436-1450.
11. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.
12. Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.
13. Gulati, R., & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from? American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439–1493.
14. Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399.
15. Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.
16. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Free Press.
17. Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. (2005). The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 12(1), 78–104.
18. Boudreau, K. J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2013). Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harvard Business Review, 91(4), 60–69.
19. Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., ... & Schafer, B. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707.
20. Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs.
21. Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 936–960.
22. Mehrabi, N., Morstatter, F., Saxena, N., Lerman, K., & Galstyan, A. (2021). A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. ACM Computing Surveys, 54(6), 115.
23. Pereira, A. G., & Stergioulas, L. K. (2023). Federated graph learning for privacy-preserving industrial analytics. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 19(2), 1876–1885.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Engineering Systems and Digital Innovation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
