15.2SOC-PHJul 30, 2022
20 years of network community detectionSanto Fortunato, M. E. J. Newman
A fundamental technical challenge in the analysis of network data is the automated discovery of communities - groups of nodes that are strongly connected or that share similar features or roles. In this commentary we review progress in the field over the last 20 years.
6.7MLJun 27, 2022
Ranking with multiple types of pairwise comparisonsM. E. J. Newman
The task of ranking individuals or teams, based on a set of comparisons between pairs, arises in various contexts, including sporting competitions and the analysis of dominance hierarchies among animals and humans. Given data on which competitors beat which others, the challenge is to rank the competitors from best to worst. Here we study the problem of computing rankings when there are multiple, potentially conflicting modes of comparison, such as multiple types of dominance behaviors among animals. We assume that we do not know a priori what information each behavior conveys about the ranking, or even whether they convey any information at all. Nonetheless we show that it is possible to compute a ranking in this situation and present a fast method for doing so, based on a combination of an expectation-maximization algorithm and a modified Bradley-Terry model. We give a selection of example applications to both animal and human competition.
5.9SIJul 29, 2019
Improved mutual information measure for classification and community detectionM. E. J. Newman, George T. Cantwell, Jean-Gabriel Young
The information theoretic quantity known as mutual information finds wide use in classification and community detection analyses to compare two classifications of the same set of objects into groups. In the context of classification algorithms, for instance, it is often used to compare discovered classes to known ground truth and hence to quantify algorithm performance. Here we argue that the standard mutual information, as commonly defined, omits a crucial term which can become large under real-world conditions, producing results that can be substantially in error. We demonstrate how to correct this error and define a mutual information that works in all cases. We discuss practical implementation of the new measure and give some example applications.
23.6SIJul 14, 2015
Structure and inference in annotated networksM. E. J. Newman, Aaron Clauset
For many networks of scientific interest we know both the connections of the network and information about the network nodes, such as the age or gender of individuals in a social network, geographic location of nodes in the Internet, or cellular function of nodes in a gene regulatory network. Here we demonstrate how this "metadata" can be used to improve our analysis and understanding of network structure. We focus in particular on the problem of community detection in networks and develop a mathematically principled approach that combines a network and its metadata to detect communities more accurately than can be done with either alone. Crucially, the method does not assume that the metadata are correlated with the communities we are trying to find. Instead the method learns whether a correlation exists and correctly uses or ignores the metadata depending on whether they contain useful information. The learned correlations are also of interest in their own right, allowing us to make predictions about the community membership of nodes whose network connections are unknown. We demonstrate our method on synthetic networks with known structure and on real-world networks, large and small, drawn from social, biological, and technological domains.