Article

Clustering drives assortativity and community structure in ensembles of networks.

Complexity Science Group, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada T2N 1N4.
Physical Review E (Impact Factor: 2.31). 12/2011; 84(6 Pt 2):066117. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.84.066117
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Clustering, assortativity, and communities are key features of complex networks. We probe dependencies between these features and find that ensembles of networks with high clustering display both high assortativity by degree and prominent community structure, while ensembles with high assortativity show much less enhancement of the clustering or community structure. Further, clustering can amplify a small homophilic bias for trait assortativity in network ensembles. This marked asymmetry suggests that transitivity could play a larger role than homophily in determining the structure of many complex networks.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
155 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We uncover the global organization of clustering in real complex networks. To this end, we ask whether triangles in real networks organize as in maximally random graphs with given degree and clustering distributions, or as in maximally ordered graph models where triangles are forced into modules. The answer comes by way of exploring m-core landscapes, where the m-core is defined, akin to the k-core, as the maximal subgraph with edges participating in at least m triangles. This property defines a set of nested subgraphs that, contrarily to k-cores, is able to distinguish between hierarchical and modular architectures. We find that the clustering organization in real networks is neither completely random nor ordered although, surprisingly, it is more random than modular. This supports the idea that the structure of real networks may in fact be the outcome of self-organized processes based on local optimization rules, in contrast to global optimization principles.
    Scientific Reports 08/2013; 3:2517. · 5.08 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: THE ASSUMPTION THAT A NAME UNIQUELY IDENTIFIES AN ENTITY INTRODUCES TWO TYPES OF ERRORS: splitting treats one entity as two or more (because of name variants); lumping treats multiple entities as if they were one (because of shared names). Here we investigate the extent to which splitting and lumping affect commonly-used measures of large-scale named-entity networks within two disambiguated bibliographic datasets: one for co-author names in biomedicine (PubMed, 2003-2007); the other for co-inventor names in U.S. patents (USPTO, 2003-2007). In both cases, we find that splitting has relatively little effect, whereas lumping has a dramatic effect on network measures. For example, in the biomedical co-authorship network, lumping (based on last name and both initials) drives several measures down: the global clustering coefficient by a factor of 4 (from 0.265 to 0.066); degree assortativity by a factor of ∼13 (from 0.763 to 0.06); and average shortest path by a factor of 1.3 (from 5.9 to 4.5). These results can be explained in part by the fact that lumping artificially creates many intransitive relationships and high-degree vertices. This effect of lumping is much less dramatic but persists with measures that give less weight to high-degree vertices, such as the mean local clustering coefficient and log-based degree assortativity. Furthermore, the log-log distribution of collaborator counts follows a much straighter line (power law) with splitting and lumping errors than without, particularly at the low and the high counts. This suggests that part of the power law often observed for collaborator counts in science and technology reflects an artifact: name ambiguity.
    PLoS ONE 07/2013; 8(7):e70299. · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chemical Space Networks (CSNs) are generated for different compound data sets on the basis of pairwise similarity relationships. Such networks are thought to complement and further extend traditional coordinate-based views of chemical space. Our proof-of-concept study focuses on CSNs based upon fingerprint similarity relationships calculated using the conventional Tanimoto similarity metric. The resulting CSNs are characterized with statistical measures from network science and compared in different ways. We show that the homophily principle, which is widely considered in the context of social networks, is a major determinant of the topology of CSNs of bioactive compounds, designed as threshold networks, typically giving rise to community structures. Many properties of CSNs are influenced by numerical features of the conventional Tanimoto similarity metric and largely dominated by the edge density of the networks, which depends on chosen similarity threshold values. However, properties of different CSNs with constant edge density can be directly compared, revealing systematic differences between CSNs generated from randomly collected or bioactive compounds.
    Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 12/2014; 29(2). · 3.17 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
64 Downloads
Available from
May 16, 2014