Defining and identifying cograph communities in complex networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community or module detection is a fundamental problem in complex networks. Most of the traditional algorithms available focus only on vertices in a subgraph that are densely connected among themselves while being loosely connected to the vertices outside the subgraph, ignoring the topological structure of the community. However, in most cases one needs to make further analysis on the interior topological structure of communities to obtain various meaningful subgroups. We thus propose a novel community referred to as a cograph community , which has a well-understood structure. The well-understood structure of cographs and their corresponding cotree representation allows for an immediate identification of structurally-equivalent subgroups. We develop an algorithm called the Edge P _4 centrality -based divisive algorithm (EPCA) to detect these cograph communities; this algorithm is efficient, free of parameters and independent of additional measures mainly due to the novel local edge P _4 centrality measure. Further, we compare the EPCA with algorithms from the existing literature on synthetic, social and biological networks to show it has superior or competitive performance in accuracy. In addition to the computational advantages over other community-detection algorithms, the EPCA provides a simple means of discovering both dense and sparse subgroups based on structural equivalence or homogeneous roles which may otherwise go undetected by other algorithms which rely on edge density measures for finding subgroups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it