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.
One of the first comparative studies is reported in @cite_45 . Four real-world networks with size up to three hundred thousand nodes are used in order to analyze the outputs of five algorithms. In this work, as the ground-truth community structure is not known, eleven quality metrics are investigated. Only two overlapping community detection algorithms are considered. First of all, it appears that the algorithms optimize the quality metrics over a range of size scales. Additionally, many quality metrics favors small clusters. Optimization of the quality metrics in the detection algorithms introduces a systematic bias into the extracted clusters. Indeed, a small variation of the quality scores can lead to great variability in the community structure. This work suggests that the link between quality metrics and the community structure is relatively loose.
@cite_45
2963455014 1565608089 2513567506 1984563107
Detecting and analyzing dense groups or communities from social and information networks has attracted immense attention over the last decade due to its enormous applicability in different domains. Community detection is an ill-defined problem, as the nature of the communities is not known in advance. The problem has turned even more complicated due to the fact that communities emerge in the network in various forms such as disjoint, overlapping, and hierarchical. Various heuristics have been proposed to address these challenges, depending on the application in hand. All these heuristics have been materialized in the form of new metrics, which in most cases are used as optimization functions for detecting the community structure, or provide an indication of the goodness of detected communities during evaluation. Over the last decade, a large number of such metrics have been proposed. Thus, there arises a need for an organized and detailed survey of the metrics proposed for community detection and evaluation. Here, we present a survey of the start-of-the-art metrics used for the detection and the evaluation of community structure. We also conduct experiments on synthetic and real networks to present a comparative analysis of these metrics in measuring the goodness of the underlying community structure. 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 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. Many networks display community structure which identifies groups of nodes within which connections are denser than between them. Detecting and characterizing such community structure, which is known as community detection, is one of the fundamental issues in the study of network systems. It has received a considerable attention in the last years. Numerous techniques have been developed for both efficient and effective community detection. Among them, the most efficient algorithm is the label propagation algorithm whose computational complexity is O (|E|). Although it is linear in the number of edges, the running time is still too long for very large networks, creating the need for parallel community detection. Also, computing community quality metrics for community structure is computationally expensive both with and without ground truth. However, to date we are not aware of any effort to introduce parallelism for this problem. In this paper, we provide a parallel toolkit to calculate the values of such metrics. We evaluate the parallel algorithms on both distributed memory machine and shared memory machine. The experimental results show that they yield a significant performance gain over sequential execution in terms of total running time, speedup, and efficiency.