Community detection is an important tool for analyzing the social graph of mobile phone users. The problem of nding communities in static graphs has been widely studied. However, since mobile social networks evolve over time, static graph algorithms are not sucient. To be useful in practice (e.g. when used by a telecom analyst), the stability of the partitions becomes critical. We tackle this particular use case in this paper: tracking evolution of com- munities in dynamic scenarios with focus on stability. We propose two modications to a widely used static community detection algorithm: we introduce xed nodes and preferential attachment to pre-existing com- munities. We then describe experiments to study the stability and quality of the resulting partitions on real-world social networks, represented by monthly call graphs for millions of subscribers.
A thorough study of the history and the state of the art in communities detection (up to 2010) can be found in @cite_1 . In particular the author discusses ideas on the roles of vertices within communities. We have implemented a classification of nodes as leaders, followers and marginals within each community. Our leaders correspond to central vertices", but we don't compute boundary vertices, which could be useful.
@cite_1
2242878970 1565608089 2963455014 2963588303
Community detection is a common problem in various types of big graphs. It is meaningful to understand the functions and dynamics of networks. The challenges of detecting community for big graphs include high computational cost, no prior information, etc.. In this work, we analyze the process of random walking in graphs, and find out that the weight of an edge gotten by processing the vertices visited by the walker could be an indicator to measure the closeness of vertex connection. Based on this idea, we propose a community detection algorithm for undirected big graphs which consists of three steps, including random walking using a single walker, weight calculating for edges and community detecting. Our algorithm is running in O(n2) without prior information. Experimental results show that our algorithm is capable of detecting the community structure and the overlapping parts of graphs in real-world effectively, and handling the challenges of community detection in big graph era. 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 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 in graphs is the problem of finding groups of vertices which are more densely connected than they are to the rest of the graph. This problem has a long history, but it is currently motivated by social and biological networks. While there are many ways to formalize it, one of the most popular is as an inference problem, where there is a planted “ground truth” community structure around which the graph is generated probabilistically. Our task is then to recover the ground truth knowing only the graph. Recently it was discovered, first h euristically i n p hysics a nd then rigorously in probability and computer science, that this problem has a phase transition at which it suddenly becomes impossible. Namely, if the graph is too sparse, or the probabilistic process that generates it is too noisy, then no algorithm can find a partition t hat i s correlated with the planted one—or even tell if there are communities, i.e., distinguish the graph from a purely random one with high probability. Above this information-theoretic threshold, there is a second threshold beyond which polynomial-time algorithms are known to succeed; in between, there is a regime in which community detection is possible, but conjectured to be exponentially hard. For computer scientists, this field offers a wealth of new ideas and open questions, with connections to probability and combinatorics, message-passing algorithms, and random matrix theory. Perhaps more importantly, it provides a window into the cultures of statistical physics and statistical inference, and how those cultures think about distributions of instances, landscapes of solutions, and hardness.