Communities in Networks Mason A

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Communities in Networks Mason A Communities in Networks Mason A. Porter, Jukka-Pekka Onnela, and Peter J. Mucha Introduction: Networks and Communities for an example). Each node has a degree given by “But although, as a matter of history, statistical the number of edges connected to it and a strength mechanics owes its origin to investigations in given by the total weight of those edges. Graphs thermodynamics, it seems eminently worthy of can represent either man-made or natural con- an independent development, both on account of structs, such as the World Wide Web or neuronal the elegance and simplicity of its principles, and synaptic networks in the brain. Agents in such because it yields new results and places old truths networked systems are like particles in traditional in a new light in departments quite outside of statistical mechanics that we all know and (pre- thermodynamics.” sumably) love, and the structure of interactions — Josiah Willard Gibbs, between agents reflects the microscopic rules that Elementary Principles in Statistical Mechanics, govern their behavior. The simplest types of links 1902 [47] are binary pairwise connections, in which one only cares about the presence or absence of a tie. How- rom an abstract perspective, the term ever, in many situations, links can also be assigned network is used as a synonym for a math- a direction and a (positive or negative) weight to ematical graph. However, to scientists designate different interaction strengths. across a variety of fields, this label means Traditional statistical physics is concerned with so much more [13,20,44,83,88,120,124]. the dynamics of ensembles of interacting and FIn sociology, each node (or vertex) of a network noninteracting particles. Rather than tracking the represents an agent, and a pair of nodes can be motion of all of the particles simultaneously, which connected by a link (or edge) that signifies some is an impossible task due to their tremendous num- social interaction or tie between them (see Figure 1 ber, one averages (in some appropriate manner) the microscopic rules that govern the dynamics Mason A. Porter, Oxford Centre for Industrial and Ap- of individual particles to make precise statements plied Mathematics, Mathematical Institute, University of of macroscopic observables such as temperature Oxford, and CABDyN Complexity Centre, University of Oxford. His email address is [email protected]. and density [112]. It is also sometimes possible to make comments about intermediate (mesoscop- Jukka-Pekka Onnela, Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard ic) structures, which lie between the microscopic University; Department of Physics, University of Oxford; and macroscopic worlds; they are large enough CABDyN Complexity Centre, University of Oxford; and that it is reasonable to discuss their collective Department of Biomedical Engineering and Computa- tional Science, Helsinki University of Technology. His email properties but small enough so that those proper- address is [email protected]. ties are obtained through averaging over smaller numbers of constituent items. One can similarly Peter J. Mucha, Carolina Center for Interdisciplinary take a collection of interacting agents, such as Applied Mathematics, Department of Mathematics, University of North Carolina, and Institute for Advanced the nodes of a network, with some set of micro- Materials, Nanoscience and Technology, University of scopic interaction rules and attempt to derive the North Carolina. His email address is [email protected]. resulting mesoscopic and macroscopic structures. 1082 Notices of the AMS Volume 56, Number 9 One mesoscopic structure, called a community, consists of a group of nodes that are relatively densely connected to each other but sparsely con- nected to other dense groups in the network [39]. We illustrate this idea in Figure 2 using a well- known benchmark network from the sociology literature [131]. The existence of social communities is intu- itively clear, and the grouping patterns of humans have been studied for a long time in both sociol- ogy [25, 44, 79] and social anthropology [66, 113]. For example, Stuart Rice clustered data by hand to investigate political blocs in the 1920s [106], and George Homans illustrated the usefulness of rearranging the rows and columns of data matrices to reveal their underlying structure in 1950 [60]. Robert Weiss and Eugene Jacobson per- formed (using organizational data) what might have been the first analysis of network commu- nity structure in 1955 [126], and Herbert Simon espoused surprisingly modern views on communi- ty structure and complex systems in general in the 1960s [117]. Social communities are ubiquitous, arising in the flocking of animals and in so- Figure 1. The largest connected component of cial organizations in every type of human society: a network of network scientists. This network groups of hunter-gatherers, feudal structures, roy- was constructed based on the coauthorship of al families, political and business organizations, papers listed in two well-known review families, villages, cities, states,nations, continents, articles [13,83] and a small number of and even virtual communities such as Facebook additional papers that were added groups [39, 88]. Indeed, the concept of commu- manually [86]. Each node is colored according nity is one of everyday familiarity. We are all to community membership, which was connected to relatives, friends, colleagues, and determined using a leading-eigenvector acquaintances who are in turn connected to each spectral method followed by Kernighan-Lin other in groups of different sizes and cohesions. node-swapping steps [64,86,107]. To The goals of studying social communities have determine community placement, we used the aligned unknowingly with the statistical physics Fruchterman-Reingold graph paradigm. As sociologist Mark Granovetter wrote visualization [45], a force-directed layout in his seminal 1973 paper[51] on weak ties, “Large- method that is related to maximizing a quality scale statistical, as well as qualitative, studies offer function known as “modularity” [92]. To apply a good deal of insight into such macro phenomena this method, we treated the communities as if as social mobility, community organization, and they were themselves the nodes of a political structure... But how interaction in small (significantly smaller) network with groups aggregates to form large-scale patterns connections rescaled by inter-community eludes us in most cases.” links. We then used the Kamada-Kawaii Sociologists recognized early that they need- spring-embedding graph visualization ed powerful mathematical tools and large-scale algorithm [62] to place the nodes of each data manipulation to address this challenging individual community (ignoring problem. An important step was taken in 2002, inter-community links) and then to rotate and when Michelle Girvan and Mark Newman brought flip the communities for optimal placement graph-partitioning problems to the broader atten- (including inter-community links). See the tion of the statistical physics and mathematics main text for further details on some of the communities [48]. Suddenly, community detec- ideas in this caption. (We gratefully tion in networks became hip among physicists acknowledge Amanda Traud for preparing this and applied mathematicians all over the world, figure.) and numerous new methods were developed to try to attack this problem. The amount of research in this area has become massive over the past seven years (with new discussions or algorithms posted on the arXiv preprint server almost every day), and the study of what has become known October 2009 Notices of the AMS 1083 context, the term module is typically used to re- fer to a single cluster of nodes. Given a network that has been partitioned into nonoverlapping modules in some fashion (although some meth- ods also allow for overlapping communities), one can continue dividing each module in an iterative fashion until each node is in its own singleton community. This hierarchical partitioning process can then be represented by a tree, or dendro- gram (see Figure 2). Such processes can yield a hierarchy of nested modules (see Figure 3), or a collection of modules at one mesoscopic 32 29 5 6 level might be obtained in an algorithm inde- 2 8 7 26 11 pendently from those at another level. However 17 25 obtained, the community structure of a network 1 24 refers to the set of graph partitions obtained at 2 each “reasonable” step of such procedures. Note 34 3 that community structure investigations rely im- 33 4 plicitly on using connected network components. 31 8 (We will assume such connectedness in our discus- 30 12 sion of community-detection algorithms below.) 13 27 Community detection can be applied individually 14 23 to separate components of networks that are not 18 21 2 connected. 0 19 22 9 16 Many real-world networks possess a natural hi- 15 10 erarchy. For example, the committee assignment Figure 2. (Top) The Zachary Karate Club network of the U.S. House of Representatives in- network [131], visualized using the cludes the House floor, groups of committees, com- Fruchterman-Reingold method [45]. Nodes are mittees, groups of subcommittees within larger colored black or white depending on their committees, and individual subcommittees [100, later club affiliation (after a disagreement 101]. As shown in Figure 4, different House com- prompted the organization’s breakup). The mittees are resolved into distinct modules within dashed lines separate different communities, this network. At a different hierarchical level, small which were determined using a groups of committees belong to larger but less leading-eigenvector spectral maximization of densely connected modules. To give an example modularity [86] with subsequent closer to home, let’s consider the departmental Kernighan-Lin node-swapping steps (see the organization at a university and suppose that discussion in the main text). (Bottom) Polar the network in Figure 3 represents collaborations coordinate dendrogram representing the among professors. (It actually represents grass- results of applying this community-detection land species interactions [23].) At one level of algorithm to the network.
Recommended publications
  • Detecting Statistically Significant Communities
    1 Detecting Statistically Significant Communities Zengyou He, Hao Liang, Zheng Chen, Can Zhao, Yan Liu Abstract—Community detection is a key data analysis problem across different fields. During the past decades, numerous algorithms have been proposed to address this issue. However, most work on community detection does not address the issue of statistical significance. Although some research efforts have been made towards mining statistically significant communities, deriving an analytical solution of p-value for one community under the configuration model is still a challenging mission that remains unsolved. The configuration model is a widely used random graph model in community detection, in which the degree of each node is preserved in the generated random networks. To partially fulfill this void, we present a tight upper bound on the p-value of a single community under the configuration model, which can be used for quantifying the statistical significance of each community analytically. Meanwhile, we present a local search method to detect statistically significant communities in an iterative manner. Experimental results demonstrate that our method is comparable with the competing methods on detecting statistically significant communities. Index Terms—Community Detection, Random Graphs, Configuration Model, Statistical Significance. F 1 INTRODUCTION ETWORKS are widely used for modeling the structure function that is able to always achieve the best performance N of complex systems in many fields, such as biology, in all possible scenarios. engineering, and social science. Within the networks, some However, most of these objective functions (metrics) do vertices with similar properties will form communities that not address the issue of statistical significance of commu- have more internal connections and less external links.
    [Show full text]
  • Centrality in Modular Networks
    Ghalmane et al. EPJ Data Science (2019)8:15 https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-019-0195-7 REGULAR ARTICLE OpenAccess Centrality in modular networks Zakariya Ghalmane1,3, Mohammed El Hassouni1, Chantal Cherifi2 and Hocine Cherifi3* *Correspondence: hocine.cherifi@u-bourgogne.fr Abstract 3LE2I, UMR6306 CNRS, University of Burgundy, Dijon, France Identifying influential nodes in a network is a fundamental issue due to its wide Full list of author information is applications, such as accelerating information diffusion or halting virus spreading. available at the end of the article Many measures based on the network topology have emerged over the years to identify influential nodes such as Betweenness, Closeness, and Eigenvalue centrality. However, although most real-world networks are made of groups of tightly connected nodes which are sparsely connected with the rest of the network in a so-called modular structure, few measures exploit this property. Recent works have shown that it has a significant effect on the dynamics of networks. In a modular network, a node has two types of influence: a local influence (on the nodes of its community) through its intra-community links and a global influence (on the nodes in other communities) through its inter-community links. Depending on the strength of the community structure, these two components are more or less influential. Based on this idea, we propose to extend all the standard centrality measures defined for networks with no community structure to modular networks. The so-called “Modular centrality” is a two-dimensional vector. Its first component quantifies the local influence of a node in its community while the second component quantifies its global influence on the other communities of the network.
    [Show full text]
  • Relational Cohesion Model of Organizational Commitment
    Cornell University ILR School DigitalCommons@ILR Articles and Chapters ILR Collection 2006 Relational Cohesion Model of Organizational Commitment Jeongkoo Yoon Ewha Womans University Edward J. Lawler Cornell University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/articles Part of the Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons, Organization Development Commons, Social Psychology and Interaction Commons, and the Work, Economy and Organizations Commons Thank you for downloading an article from DigitalCommons@ILR. Support this valuable resource today! This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the ILR Collection at DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles and Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. If you have a disability and are having trouble accessing information on this website or need materials in an alternate format, contact [email protected] for assistance. Relational Cohesion Model of Organizational Commitment Abstract [Excerpt] This chapter reviews the research program of relational cohesion theory (RCT) (Lawler & Yoon, 1993, 1996, 1998; Lawler et al., 2000; Thye et al., 2002) and uses it to develop a model of organizational commitment. Broadly, relational cohesion theory (RCT) has attempted to understand conditions and processes that promote an expressive relation in social exchange; an expressive relation is indicated by relational cohesion, that is, the degree to which exchange partners perceive their relationship as a unifying object having its own value. The research program argues that such relational cohesion is a proximal cause of various forms of behavioral commitment in a group setting, for example stay behavior, gift-giving and investment.
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporating Network Structure with Node Contents for Community Detection on Large Networks Using Deep Learning
    Neurocomputing 297 (2018) 71–81 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Neurocomputing journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/neucom Incorporating network structure with node contents for community detection on large networks using deep learning ∗ Jinxin Cao a, Di Jin a, , Liang Yang c, Jianwu Dang a,b a School of Computer Science and Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China b School of Information Science, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Ishikawa 923-1292, Japan c School of Computer Science and Engineering, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin 300401, China a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: Community detection is an important task in social network analysis. In community detection, in gen- Received 3 June 2017 eral, there exist two types of the models that utilize either network topology or node contents. Some Revised 19 December 2017 studies endeavor to incorporate these two types of models under the framework of spectral clustering Accepted 28 January 2018 for a better community detection. However, it was not successful to obtain a big achievement since they Available online 2 February 2018 used a simple way for the combination. To reach a better community detection, it requires to realize a Communicated by Prof. FangXiang Wu seamless combination of these two methods. For this purpose, we re-examine the properties of the mod- ularity maximization and normalized-cut models and fund out a certain approach to realize a seamless Keywords: Community detection combination of these two models. These two models seek for a low-rank embedding to represent of the Deep learning community structure and reconstruct the network topology and node contents, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Cohesion Model (White and Harary, 2001; Moody and White, 2003)
    Structural Cohesion: Visualization and Heuristics for Fast Computation Jordi Torrents Fabrizio Ferraro [email protected] [email protected] March 19, 2018 Abstract The structural cohesion model is a powerful theoretical conception of cohesion in social groups, but its diffusion in empirical literature has been hampered by operationalization and computational problems. In this paper we start from the classic definition of structural co- hesion as the minimum number of actors who need to be removed in a network in order to disconnect it, and extend it by using average node connectivity as a finer grained measure of cohesion. We present useful heuristics for computing structural cohesion that allow a speed-up of one order of magnitude over the algorithms currently available. We analyze three large collaboration networks (co-maintenance of Debian packages, co-authorship in Nuclear Theory and High-Energy Theory) and show how our approach can help researchers measure structural cohesion in relatively large networks. We also introduce a novel graph- ical representation of the structural cohesion analysis to quickly spot differences across networks. Keywords: structural cohesion, k-components, node connectivity, average connectivity, co- hesion arXiv:1503.04476v1 [cs.SI] 15 Mar 2015 We, the authors, are in-debted to Aric Hagberg and Dan Schult, developers of the NetworkX python library, for their help in the implementation of the heuristics presented in this paper. We would also like to thank Matteo Prato, Marco Tortoriello, Marco Tonellato, Kaisa Snell- man, Francois Collet and Dan McFarland for their comments on early versions of this paper. We gratefully acknowledge funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme - ERC-2010-StG 263604 - SRITECH 1 Group cohesion is a central concept that has a long and illustrious history in sociology and organization theory, although its precise characterization has remained elusive.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Community Detection Over Social Media: Graph Prospective
    (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2019 Review of Community Detection over Social Media: Graph Prospective Pranita Jain1, Deepak Singh Tomar2 Department of Computer Science Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology Bhopal, India 462001 Abstract—Community over the social media is the group of globally distributed end users having similar attitude towards a particular topic or product. Community detection algorithm is used to identify the social atoms that are more densely interconnected relatively to the rest over the social media platform. Recently researchers focused on group-based algorithm and member-based algorithm for community detection over social media. This paper presents comprehensive overview of community detection technique based on recent research and subsequently explores graphical prospective of social media mining and social theory (Balance theory, status theory, correlation theory) over community detection. Along with that this paper presents a comparative analysis of three different state of art community detection algorithm available on I-Graph package on python i.e. walk trap, edge betweenness and fast greedy over six different social media data set. That yield intersecting facts about the capabilities and deficiency of community analysis methods. Fig 1. Social Media Network. Keywords—Community detection; social media; social media Aim of Community detection is to form group of mining; homophily; influence; confounding; social theory; homogenous nodes and figure out a strongly linked subgraphs community detection algorithm from heterogeneous network. In strongly linked sub- graphs (Community structure) nodes have more internal links than I. INTRODUCTION external. Detecting communities in heterogeneous networks is The Emergence of Social networking Site (SNS) like Face- same as, the graph partition problem in modern graph theory book, Twitter, LinkedIn, MySpace, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Closeness Centrality for Networks with Overlapping Community Structure
    Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-16) Closeness Centrality for Networks with Overlapping Community Structure Mateusz K. Tarkowski1 and Piotr Szczepanski´ 2 Talal Rahwan3 and Tomasz P. Michalak1,4 and Michael Wooldridge1 2Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, United Kingdom 2 Warsaw University of Technology, Poland 3Masdar Institute of Science and Technology, United Arab Emirates 4Institute of Informatics, University of Warsaw, Poland Abstract One aspect of networks that has been largely ignored in the literature on centrality is the fact that certain real-life Certain real-life networks have a community structure in which communities overlap. For example, a typical bus net- networks have a predefined community structure. In public work includes bus stops (nodes), which belong to one or more transportation networks, for example, bus stops are typically bus lines (communities) that often overlap. Clearly, it is im- grouped by the bus lines (or routes) that visit them. In coau- portant to take this information into account when measur- thorship networks, the various venues where authors pub- ing the centrality of a bus stop—how important it is to the lish can be interpreted as communities (Szczepanski,´ Micha- functioning of the network. For example, if a certain stop be- lak, and Wooldridge 2014). In social networks, individuals comes inaccessible, the impact will depend in part on the bus grouped by similar interests can be thought of as members lines that visit it. However, existing centrality measures do not of a community. Clearly for such networks, it is desirable take such information into account. Our aim is to bridge this to have a centrality measure that accounts for the prede- gap.
    [Show full text]
  • A Centrality Measure for Networks with Community Structure Based on a Generalization of the Owen Value
    ECAI 2014 867 T. Schaub et al. (Eds.) © 2014 The Authors and IOS Press. This article is published online with Open Access by IOS Press and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License. doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-419-0-867 A Centrality Measure for Networks With Community Structure Based on a Generalization of the Owen Value Piotr L. Szczepanski´ 1 and Tomasz P. Michalak2 ,3 and Michael Wooldridge2 Abstract. There is currently much interest in the problem of mea- cated — approaches have been considered in the literature. Recently, suring the centrality of nodes in networks/graphs; such measures various methods for the analysis of cooperative games have been ad- have a range of applications, from social network analysis, to chem- vocated as measures of centrality [16, 10]. The key idea behind this istry and biology. In this paper we propose the first measure of node approach is to consider groups (or coalitions) of nodes instead of only centrality that takes into account the community structure of the un- considering individual nodes. By doing so this approach accounts for derlying network. Our measure builds upon the recent literature on potential synergies between groups of nodes that become visible only game-theoretic centralities, where solution concepts from coopera- if the value of nodes are analysed jointly [18]. Next, given all poten- tive game theory are used to reason about importance of nodes in the tial groups of nodes, game-theoretic solution concepts can be used to network. To allow for flexible modelling of community structures, reason about players (i.e., nodes) in such a coalitional game.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Diversity and Homophily: a Study Across More Than One Hundred Big Networks
    KDD 2017 Research Paper KDD’17, August 13–17, 2017, Halifax, NS, Canada Structural Diversity and Homophily: A Study Across More Than One Hundred Big Networks Yuxiao Dong∗ Reid A. Johnson Microso Research University of Notre Dame Redmond, WA 98052 Notre Dame, IN 46556 [email protected] [email protected] Jian Xu Nitesh V. Chawla University of Notre Dame University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, IN 46556 Notre Dame, IN 46556 [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT ACM Reference format: A widely recognized organizing principle of networks is structural Yuxiao Dong, Reid A. Johnson, Jian Xu, and Nitesh V. Chawla. 2017. Struc- tural Diversity and Homophily: A Study Across More an One Hundred homophily, which suggests that people with more common neigh- Big Networks. In Proceedings of KDD ’17, August 13–17, 2017, Halifax, NS, bors are more likely to connect with each other. However, what in- Canada., , 10 pages. uence the diverse structures embedded in common neighbors (e.g., DOI: hp://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3097983.3098116 and ) have on link formation is much less well-understood. To explore this problem, we begin by characterizing the structural diversity of common neighborhoods. Using a collection of 120 large- 1 INTRODUCTION scale networks, we demonstrate that the impact of the common neighborhood diversity on link existence can vary substantially Since the time of Aristotle, it has been observed that people “love across networks. We nd that its positive eect on Facebook and those who are like themselves” [2]. We now know this as the negative eect on LinkedIn suggest dierent underlying network- principle of homophily, which asserts that people’s propensity to ing needs in these networks.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Nadel's Paradox. a Computational Approach to Structural and Cultural Dimensions of Social Cohesion
    Beyond Nadel’s Paradox. A computational approach to structural and cultural dimensions of social cohesion S. Lozano ETH Zurich, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland. J. Borge Department of Psychology, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain A. Arenas Department of Computer Sciences and Math, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain and J.L. Molina Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. Received ; accepted arXiv:0807.2880v1 [physics.soc-ph] 17 Jul 2008 –2– ABSTRACT Nadel’s Paradox states that it is not possible to take into account simulta- neously cultural and relational dimensions of social structure. By means of a simple computational model, the authors explore a dynamic perspective of the concept of social cohesion that enables the integration of both structural and cultural dimensions in the same analysis. The design of the model reproduces a causal path from the level of conflict suffered by a population to variations on its social cohesiveness, observed both from a structural and cognitive viewpoint. Submitted to sudden variations on its environmental conflict level, the model is able to reproduce certain characteristics previously observed in real populations under situations of emergency or crisis. Subject headings: social cohesion, dynamic analysis, social structure, conflict, social networks –3– 1. Introduction Paul Dimaggio (Dimaggio 1992) remembers us the Nadel’s Paradox, who followed the distinction done for Radcliffe-Brown (Radcliffe-Brown 1940) and the British structural- functionalist school between culture and structure: This is Nadel’s Paradox: A satisfactory approach to social structure requires simultaneous attention to both cultural and relational aspects of role-related behavior.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Extraction in Multilayer Networks with Heterogeneous Community Structure
    Journal of Machine Learning Research 18 (2017) 1-49 Submitted 12/16; Revised 9/17; Published 11/17 Community Extraction in Multilayer Networks with Heterogeneous Community Structure James D. Wilson∗ [email protected] Department of Mathematics and Statistics University of San Francisco San Francisco, CA 94117-1080 John Palowitch∗ [email protected] Shankar Bhamidi [email protected] Andrew B. Nobel [email protected] Department of Statistics and Operations Research University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27599 Editor: Edo Airoldi Abstract Multilayer networks are a useful way to capture and model multiple, binary or weighted relationships among a fixed group of objects. While community detection has proven to be a useful exploratory technique for the analysis of single-layer networks, the develop- ment of community detection methods for multilayer networks is still in its infancy. We propose and investigate a procedure, called Multilayer Extraction, that identifies densely connected vertex-layer sets in multilayer networks. Multilayer Extraction makes use of a significance based score that quantifies the connectivity of an observed vertex-layer set through comparison with a fixed degree random graph model. Multilayer Extraction di- rectly handles networks with heterogeneous layers where community structure may be different from layer to layer. The procedure can capture overlapping communities, as well as background vertex-layer pairs that do not belong to any community. We estab- lish consistency of the vertex-layer set optimizer of our proposed multilayer score un- der the multilayer stochastic block model. We investigate the performance of Multi- layer Extraction on three applications and a test bed of simulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Hidden Community Detection in Online Forums
    Hidden Community Detection in Online Forums Daniel Salz Nicholas Benavides Jonathan Li Stanford University Stanford University Stanford University [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract cial networks, communities take on a very re- latable meaning, as communities of users are This project investigated both dominant and densely connected and may share common in- hidden community structure on a network of in- terests, backgrounds, or experiences. Online fo- teractions between subreddits on Reddit.com. We rums, such as Reddit, are generally divided into identified moderate community structure using communities based on the topic of the forum (ie the Louvain algorithm, and we also detected some r/nba for NBA fans or r/politics for those inter- hidden community structure with the HICODE ested in political news and discussions). The algorithm. We also explored a method to de- users in a specific forum can be thought of as tect future communities that involved predicting members of a community, but we can also think new edges and their weights, adding the predicted about groups of these forums as communities in edges to the existing network, and re-running the their own right. Louvain and HICODE algorithms to determine Within the field of community detection, there changes in the community structure. While the has been some interesting research conducted on edge weight prediction was a difficult task, we the topic of hidden community detection, which found that a linear regression model using 256- attempts to identify weaker community structure dimension node embeddings yielded the best re- that often goes undetected by the popular commu- sults.
    [Show full text]