Story 08 · 12 October 2026
Who holds this map together?
SICK makes sensors. On our map it also connects groups of organisations: more of the shortest routes between two others run through it than through anyone else. How much of that depends on SICK alone? We erase its dot, keep everyone else, and count who can still reach whom.
Field of viewThe map’s default view — 6,476 organisations, 8,739 tied pairs, every kind of tie together — and a removal test on it. It describes the routes in our record, not anyone’s dependence in the industry; the data page measures each kind of tie on its own.How much can this map see?
01 · A piece of the map
What does a line on this map establish?
Data table
| Node | Kind | Joined to | What we hold |
|---|---|---|---|
| SICK AG | organisation | CNRS (shared project); Neura Robotics (same show); European Commission (grant); Naïo Technologies (shared project); Boston Dynamics (same show); Fraunhofer (shared project); KUKA (same show); VTT (shared project); SCHUNK (same show); Politecnico di Milano (shared project); Agility Robotics (same show); KU Leuven (shared project) | SICK AG: company, DE. |
| CNRS | organisation | SICK AG (shared project); Naïo Technologies | CNRS: large group, FR. |
| Neura Robotics | organisation | SICK AG (same show); European Commission; Boston Dynamics; KUKA; SCHUNK; Agility Robotics; KU Leuven | Neura Robotics: company, DE. |
| European Commission | organisation | SICK AG (grant); Neura Robotics; Naïo Technologies | European Commission: large group, BE. |
| Naïo Technologies | organisation | SICK AG (shared project); CNRS; European Commission; Fraunhofer; KU Leuven | Naïo Technologies: company, FR. |
| Boston Dynamics | organisation | SICK AG (same show); Neura Robotics; KUKA; SCHUNK; Agility Robotics | Boston Dynamics: company, US. |
| Fraunhofer | organisation | SICK AG (shared project); Naïo Technologies | Fraunhofer Gesellschaft ZUR Forderung der Angewandten Forschung eV: large group, DE. |
| KUKA | organisation | SICK AG (same show); Neura Robotics; Boston Dynamics; SCHUNK | KUKA: company, DE. |
| VTT | organisation | SICK AG (shared project) | Teknologian Tutkimuskeskus VTT Oy: large group, FI. |
| SCHUNK | organisation | SICK AG (same show); Neura Robotics; Boston Dynamics; KUKA | SCHUNK: company, DE. |
| Politecnico di Milano | organisation | SICK AG (shared project) | Politecnico di Milano: large group, IT. |
| Agility Robotics | organisation | SICK AG (same show); Neura Robotics; Boston Dynamics | Agility Robotics: company, US. |
| KU Leuven | organisation | SICK AG (shared project); Neura Robotics; Naïo Technologies | Katholieke Universiteit Leuven: large group, BE. |
SICK AG makes sensors, the kind a robot uses to see a pallet or a person. On our map it has 173 ties, and each line means one exact thing: a company states on its website that it partners with SICK, two organisations share a European project, a paper carries both names. The kinds are labelled on the drawing. Read a chain of lines with care. A path from a French startup to SICK to a German university is two records; it is not money, knowledge or parts moving along it. We keep that in mind for everything that follows.
02 · A route
What does “between” mean?
Data table
| Node | Kind | Joined to | What we hold |
|---|---|---|---|
| SICK AG | organisation | CNRS (shared project); Neura Robotics (same show); European Commission (grant); Naïo Technologies (shared project); Boston Dynamics (same show); Fraunhofer (shared project); KUKA (same show); VTT (shared project); SCHUNK (same show); Politecnico di Milano (shared project); Agility Robotics (same show); KU Leuven (shared project) | SICK AG: company, DE. |
| CNRS | organisation | SICK AG (shared project); Naïo Technologies | CNRS: large group, FR. |
| Neura Robotics | organisation | SICK AG (same show); European Commission (grant); Boston Dynamics (same show); KUKA; SCHUNK; Agility Robotics; KU Leuven | Neura Robotics: company, DE. |
| European Commission | organisation | SICK AG (grant); Neura Robotics (grant); Naïo Technologies | European Commission: large group, BE. |
| Naïo Technologies | organisation | SICK AG (shared project); CNRS; European Commission; Fraunhofer; KU Leuven | Naïo Technologies: company, FR. |
| Boston Dynamics | organisation | SICK AG (same show); Neura Robotics (same show); KUKA; SCHUNK; Agility Robotics | Boston Dynamics: company, US. |
| Fraunhofer | organisation | SICK AG (shared project); Naïo Technologies | Fraunhofer Gesellschaft ZUR Forderung der Angewandten Forschung eV: large group, DE. |
| KUKA | organisation | SICK AG (same show); Neura Robotics; Boston Dynamics; SCHUNK | KUKA: company, DE. |
| VTT | organisation | SICK AG (shared project) | Teknologian Tutkimuskeskus VTT Oy: large group, FI. |
| SCHUNK | organisation | SICK AG (same show); Neura Robotics; Boston Dynamics; KUKA | SCHUNK: company, DE. |
| Politecnico di Milano | organisation | SICK AG (shared project) | Politecnico di Milano: large group, IT. |
| Agility Robotics | organisation | SICK AG (same show); Neura Robotics; Boston Dynamics | Agility Robotics: company, US. |
| KU Leuven | organisation | SICK AG (shared project); Neura Robotics; Naïo Technologies | Katholieke Universiteit Leuven: large group, BE. |
Take two organisations on the map and find the shortest route between them. Do that for every pair, and count how often the route passes through one dot: that share is its betweenness. SICK’s is the highest on the map, 12% of shortest routes between two other organisations. A high share does not mean the dot is indispensable. The shortest route can pass through SICK while a longer one goes round; betweenness counts the shortest and ignores the rest. To know whether anyone actually depends on a dot, you have to take it out.
03 · Take SICK out
Who can still reach whom without it?
Data table
| Item | pairs left with no path |
|---|---|
| SICK AG removed | 503,559.0 |
| European Commission removed | 23,057.0 |
| One at random (mean) | 6625.9 |
Erase SICK’s dot, keep every other dot and line, and count the pairs of organisations that could reach each other before and cannot now: 503,559, 3.0% of the 16,634,713 pairs the map connected. Erase the European Commission instead, whose betweenness is nearly as high, and only 23,057 pairs lose their path, 0.1%. Erase one organisation at random and 6,626 do on average. Same measure, similar score, very different consequence. SICK sits on routes the map has no other way around; the Commission sits on routes that also run elsewhere, because a funder tied to a thousand recipients is one dot on many parallel paths.
04 · What it means
Does the map depend on SICK?
Data table
| Item | pairs left with no path |
|---|---|
| SICK AG removed | 503,559.0 |
| European Commission removed | 23,057.0 |
| One at random (mean) | 6625.9 |
A high shortest-path score and an irreplaceable connection are two different properties, and the map shows both. That is the whole finding, and it is a finding about our record: the routes through SICK are the shared projects we collected and the trade shows where it was listed beside others, drawn under the map’s two rules. It says nothing about whether a factory would stop without SICK’s sensors. Change what we collect, or lift the rules that cut the map, and the routes change; the data page runs a removal test of its own. To see how the rules shape the graph, read the story beside this one.