Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
157 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
43 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Community detection in bipartite signed networks is highly dependent on parameter choice (2405.08203v1)

Published 13 May 2024 in physics.soc-ph, cs.SI, and stat.ME

Abstract: Decision-making processes often involve voting. Human interactions with exogenous entities such as legislations or products can be effectively modeled as two-mode (bipartite) signed networks-where people can either vote positively, negatively, or abstain from voting on the entities. Detecting communities in such networks could help us understand underlying properties: for example ideological camps or consumer preferences. While community detection is an established practice separately for bipartite and signed networks, it remains largely unexplored in the case of bipartite signed networks. In this paper, we systematically evaluate the efficacy of community detection methods on bipartite signed networks using a synthetic benchmark and real-world datasets. Our findings reveal that when no communities are present in the data, these methods often recover spurious communities. When communities are present, the algorithms exhibit promising performance, although their performance is highly susceptible to parameter choice. This indicates that researchers using community detection methods in the context of bipartite signed networks should not take the communities found at face value: it is essential to assess the robustness of parameter choices or perform domain-specific external validation.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (58)
  1. Fortunato, S. Community detection in graphs. \JournalTitlePhysics Reports 486, 75–174, DOI: 10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002 (2010). 0906.0612.
  2. Barber, M. J. Modularity and community detection in bipartite networks. \JournalTitlePhys. Rev. E 76, 066102, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.76.066102 (2007).
  3. Community detection in bipartite networks with stochastic block models. \JournalTitlePhys. Rev. E 102, 032309, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.102.032309 (2020).
  4. Beckett, S. J. Improved community detection in weighted bipartite networks. \JournalTitleR. Soc. open sci. 3, 140536, DOI: 10.1098/rsos.140536 (2016).
  5. A partitioning approach to structural balance. \JournalTitleSocial Networks 18, 149–168, DOI: 10.1016/0378-8733(95)00259-6 (1996).
  6. Advances in Scaling Community Discovery Methods for Signed Graph Networks. \JournalTitleJournal of Complex Networks 10, cnac013, DOI: 10.1093/comnet/cnac013 (2022). 2110.07514.
  7. SPONGE: A generalized eigenproblem for clustering signed networks, DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1904.08575 (2019). 1904.08575.
  8. Community detection in networks with positive and negative links. \JournalTitlePhys. Rev. E 80, 036115, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.80.036115 (2009). 0811.2329.
  9. Partitioning signed social networks. \JournalTitleSocial Networks 31, 1–11, DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2008.08.001 (2009).
  10. Neal, Z. P. A sign of the times? Weak and strong polarization in the U.S. Congress, 1973–2016. \JournalTitleSocial Networks 60, 103–112, DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2018.07.007 (2020).
  11. Signed networks in social media. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1361–1370, DOI: 10.1145/1753326.1753532 (ACM, Atlanta Georgia USA, 2010).
  12. Avoidance, antipathy, and aggression: A three-wave longitudinal network study on negative networks, status, and heteromisos. \JournalTitleSocial Networks 64, 122–133, DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2020.08.006 (2021).
  13. Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives. https://clerk.house.gov/.
  14. Menéame - Portada de noticias de. https://www.meneame.net/.
  15. Cluster analysis of networks generated through homology: Automatic identification of important protein communities involved in cancer metastasis. \JournalTitleBMC Bioinformatics 7, 2, DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-7-2 (2006).
  16. The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: Divided they blog. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Link Discovery, LinkKDD ’05, 36–43, DOI: 10.1145/1134271.1134277 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2005).
  17. Community structure in social and biological networks. \JournalTitleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99, 7821–7826, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.122653799 (2002).
  18. Polarization and multiscale structural balance in signed networks. \JournalTitleCommun Phys 6, 1–15, DOI: 10.1038/s42005-023-01467-8 (2023).
  19. Discovering Polarized Communities in Signed Networks. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM ’19, 961–970, DOI: 10.1145/3357384.3357977 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2019).
  20. Heider, F. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. (John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken, NJ, US, 1958).
  21. Structural balance: A generalization of Heider’s theory. \JournalTitlePsychological Review 63, 277–293, DOI: 10.1037/h0046049 (1956).
  22. Walk-based measure of balance in signed networks: Detecting lack of balance in social networks. \JournalTitlePhys. Rev. E 90, 042802, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.90.042802 (2014).
  23. Measuring Partial Balance in Signed Networks. \JournalTitleJournal of Complex Networks 6, 566–595, DOI: 10.1093/comnet/cnx044 (2018). 1509.04037.
  24. Estrada, E. Rethinking structural balance in signed social networks. \JournalTitleDiscrete Applied Mathematics 268, 70–90, DOI: 10.1016/j.dam.2019.04.019 (2019).
  25. Structural Balance and Signed International Relations. \JournalTitleJournal of Social Structure 16, 1–49, DOI: 10.21307/joss-2019-012 (2015).
  26. Local balance of signed networks: Definition and application to reveal historical events in international relations. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.03774v2 (2023).
  27. Unpacking polarization: Antagonism and Alignment in Signed Networks of Online Interaction. https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.06571v2 (2023).
  28. Balance and Frustration in Signed Networks. \JournalTitleJournal of Complex Networks 7, 163–189, DOI: 10.1093/comnet/cny015 (2019). 1712.04628.
  29. Davis, J. A. Clustering and Structural Balance in Graphs. \JournalTitleHuman Relations 20, 181–187, DOI: 10.1177/001872676702000206 (1967).
  30. Asratian, A. S. Bipartite Graphs and Their Applications (Cambridge, U.K. ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1998).
  31. Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. \JournalTitleNature 393, 440–442, DOI: 10.1038/30918 (1998).
  32. Balance in Signed Bipartite Networks (2019). 1909.06073.
  33. Varying-coefficient models for dynamic networks. \JournalTitleComputational Statistics & Data Analysis 152, 107052, DOI: 10.1016/j.csda.2020.107052 (2020).
  34. Andris, C. et al. The Rise of Partisanship and Super-Cooperators in the U.S. House of Representatives. \JournalTitlePLoS ONE 10, e0123507, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123507 (2015).
  35. The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction (CUP Archive, 1984).
  36. A Spatial Model for Legislative Roll Call Analysis. \JournalTitleAmerican Journal of Political Science 29, 357–384, DOI: 10.2307/2111172 (1985). 2111172.
  37. Poole, K. T. Spatial Models of Parliamentary Voting. Analytical Methods for Social Research (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge ; New York, 2005).
  38. The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data. \JournalTitleAmerican Political Science Review 98, 355–370, DOI: 10.1017/S0003055404001194 (2004).
  39. Spatial voting models in circular spaces: A case study of the U.S. House of Representatives. \JournalTitleThe Annals of Applied Statistics 15, 1897–1922, DOI: 10.1214/21-AOAS1454 (2021).
  40. Portrait of Political Party Polarization. \JournalTitleNetw. sci. 1, 119–121, DOI: 10.1017/nws.2012.3 (2013).
  41. Party Polarization in Congress: A Network Science Approach. \JournalTitlearXiv DOI: 10.48550/ARXIV.0907.3509 (2009).
  42. Zhang, Y. et al. Community Structure in Congressional Cosponsorship Networks. \JournalTitlePhysica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 387, 1705–1712, DOI: 10.1016/j.physa.2007.11.004 (2008). 0708.1191.
  43. Community Structure in Time-Dependent, Multiscale, and Multiplex Networks. \JournalTitleScience 328, 876–878, DOI: 10.1126/science.1184819 (2010). 0911.1824.
  44. Modeling and detecting change in temporal networks via a dynamic degree corrected stochastic block model (2016). 1605.04049.
  45. Signed Bipartite Graph Neural Networks (2021). 2108.09638.
  46. Institute, A. T. SigNet package. https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/SigNet (2023).
  47. Statistical Mechanics of Community Detection. \JournalTitlePhys. Rev. E 74, 016110, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.74.016110 (2006). cond-mat/0603718.
  48. The Igraph Software Package for Complex Network Research. \JournalTitleInterJournal Complex Systems, 1695 (2005).
  49. Rand, W. M. Objective Criteria for the Evaluation of Clustering Methods. \JournalTitleJournal of the American Statistical Association 66, 846–850, DOI: 10.1080/01621459.1971.10482356 (1971).
  50. Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. \JournalTitleJournal of Machine Learning Research 12, 2825–2830 (2011).
  51. Mccarty, N. The Policy Effects of Political Polarization. In Pierson, P. & Skocpol, T. (eds.) The Transformation of American Politics, 223–255, DOI: 10.1515/9781400837502-013 (Princeton University Press, 2007).
  52. Comparing partitions. \JournalTitleJournal of Classification 2, 193–218, DOI: 10.1007/BF01908075 (1985).
  53. Information theoretic measures for clusterings comparison: Is a correction for chance necessary? In Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Machine Learning, 1073–1080, DOI: 10.1145/1553374.1553511 (ACM, Montreal Quebec Canada, 2009).
  54. V-Measure: A Conditional Entropy-Based External Cluster Evaluation Measure. In Eisner, J. (ed.) Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL), 410–420 (Association for Computational Linguistics, Prague, Czech Republic, 2007).
  55. Stochastic blockmodels: First steps. \JournalTitleSocial Networks 5, 109–137, DOI: 10.1016/0378-8733(83)90021-7 (1983).
  56. Peixoto, T. P. Bayesian Stochastic Blockmodeling. In Advances in Network Clustering and Blockmodeling, chap. 11, 289–332, DOI: 10.1002/9781119483298.ch11 (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2019).
  57. Peixoto, T. P. Nonparametric weighted stochastic block models. \JournalTitlePhys. Rev. E 97, 012306, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.97.012306 (2018).
  58. Peixoto, T. P. The graph-tool python library, DOI: 10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.1164194 (2017).

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now