Community structure is of paramount importance for the understanding of complex networks. Consequently, there is a tremendous effort in order to develop efficient community detection algorithms. Unfortunately, the issue of a fair assessment of these algorithms is a thriving open question. If the ground-truth community structure is available, various clustering-based metrics are used in order to compare it versus the one discovered by these algorithms. However, these metrics defined at the node level are fairly insensitive to the variation of the overall community structure. To overcome these limitations, we propose to exploit the topological features of the 'community graphs' (where the nodes are the communities and the links represent their interactions) in order to evaluate the algorithms. To illustrate our methodology, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of overlapping community detection algorithms using a set of real-world networks with known a priori community structure. Results provide a better perception of their relative performance as compared to classical metrics. Moreover, they show that more emphasis should be put on the topology of the community structure. We also investigate the relationship between the topological properties of the community structure and the alternative evaluation measures (quality metrics and clustering metrics). It appears clearly that they present different views of the community structure and that they must be combined in order to evaluate the effectiveness of community detection algorithms.
Very relevant to our work is that of @cite_13 . Five real-world networks http: snap.stanford.edu data index.html with known ground-truth are analyzed. Thirteen community detection methods, including five algorithms that allow overlapping, are compared. To evaluate the outputs of the algorithms, quality metrics and clustering measures are used. The results of their experiments show that there is no clear relation between the scores of the quality metrics and the clustering measures. This is in line with recent findings. Indeed, clustering metrics are based on the functional ground-truth community structure while quality metrics describe topological properties linked to cohesiveness.
@cite_13
2513567506 2964179816 2020547732 1565608089
Across many scientific domains, there is a common need to automatically extract a simplified view or coarse-graining of how a complex system’s components interact. This general task is called community detection in networks and is analogous to searching for clusters in independent vector data. It is common to evaluate the performance of community detection algorithms by their ability to find so-called ground truth communities. This works well in synthetic networks with planted communities because these networks’ links are formed explicitly based on those known communities. However, there are no planted communities in real-world networks. Instead, it is standard practice to treat some observed discrete-valued node attributes, or metadata, as ground truth. We show that metadata are not the same as ground truth and that treating them as such induces severe theoretical and practical problems. We prove that no algorithm can uniquely solve community detection, and we prove a general No Free Lunch theorem for community detection, which implies that there can be no algorithm that is optimal for all possible community detection tasks. However, community detection remains a powerful tool and node metadata still have value, so a careful exploration of their relationship with network structure can yield insights of genuine worth. We illustrate this point by introducing two statistical techniques that can quantify the relationship between metadata and community structure for a broad class of models. We demonstrate these techniques using both synthetic and real-world networks, and for multiple types of metadata and community structures. This paper establishes the consistency of a family of graph-cut-based algorithms for clustering of data clouds. We consider point clouds obtained as samples of a ground-truth measure. We investigate approaches to clustering based on minimizing objective functionals defined on proximity graphs of the given sample. Our focus is on functionals based on graph cuts like the Cheeger and ratio cuts. We show that minimizers of these cuts converge as the sample size increases to a minimizer of a corresponding continuum cut (which partitions the ground truth measure). Moreover, we obtain sharp conditions on how the connectivity radius can be scaled with respect to the number of sample points for the consistency to hold. We provide results for two-way and for multiway cuts. Furthermore we provide numerical experiments that illustrate the results and explore the optimality of scaling in dimension two. One of the main organizing principles in real-world networks is that of network communities, where sets of nodes organize into densely linked clusters. Even though detection of such communities is of great interest, understanding the structure communities in large networks remains relatively limited. In particular, due to the unavailability of labeled ground-truth data, it was traditionally very hard to develop accurate models of network community structure. Here we use six large social, collaboration, and information networks where nodes explicitly state their ground-truth community memberships. For example, nodes in social networks join into explicitly defined interest based groups, and we use such groups as explicitly labeled ground-truth communities. We use such ground-truth communities to study their structural signatures by analyzing how ground-truth communities emerge in networks and how they overlap. We observe some surprising phenomena. First, ground-truth communities contain high-degree hub nodes that reside in community overlaps and link to most of the members of the community. Second, the overlaps of communities are more densely connected than the non-overlapping parts of communities. We show that this in contrast to the conventional wisdom that community overlaps are more sparsely connected than the non-overlapping parts themselves. We then show that many existing models of network communities do not capture dense community overlaps. This in turn means that most present models and community detection methods confuse overlaps as separate communities. In contrast, we present the community-affiliation graph model (AGM), a conceptual model of network community structure. We demonstrate that AGM reliably captures the overall structure of networks as well as the overlapping and hierarchical nature of network communities. Community detection is a common problem in graph data analytics that consists of finding groups of densely connected nodes with few connections to nodes outside of the group. In particular, identifying communities in large-scale networks is an important task in many scientific domains. In this review, we evaluated eight state-of-the-art and five traditional algorithms for overlapping and disjoint community detection on large-scale real-world networks with known ground-truth communities. These 13 algorithms were empirically compared using goodness metrics that measure the structural properties of the identified communities, as well as performance metrics that evaluate these communities against the ground-truth. Our results show that these two types of metrics are not equivalent. That is, an algorithm may perform well in terms of goodness metrics, but poorly in terms of performance metrics, or vice versa. © 2014 The Authors. WIREs Computational