MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285189722 · doi:10.1016/j.physa.2016.10.021

Exploring triad-rich substructures by graph-theoretic characterizations in complex networks

2016· article· en· W2285189722 on OpenAlexaff
Songwei Jia, Lin Gao, Yong Gao, James Nastos, Wen Xiao, Xindong Zhang, Haiyang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysica A Statistical Mechanics and its Applications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsOkanagan CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSubstructureTriad (sociology)Computer scienceComplex networkCommunity structureCentralityTheoretical computer scienceProperty (philosophy)GraphData miningMathematicsSociologyCombinatoricsWorld Wide WebEngineeringEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most important problems in complex networks is how to detect communities accurately. The main challenge lies in the fact that traditional definition about communities does not always capture the intrinsic features of communities. Motivated by the observation that communities in PPI networks tend to consist of an abundance of interacting triad motifs, we define a 2-club substructure with diameter 2 possessing triad-rich property to describe a community. Based on the triad-rich substructure, we design a DIVision Algorithm using our proposed edge Niche Centrality DIVANC to detect communities effectively in complex networks. We also extend DIVANC to detect overlapping communities by proposing a simple 2-hop overlapping strategy. To verify the effectiveness of triad-rich substructures, we compare DIVANC with existing algorithms on PPI networks, LFR synthetic networks and football networks. The experimental results show that DIVANC outperforms most other algorithms significantly and, in particular, can detect sparse communities.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.664

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysica A Statistical Mechanics and its ApplicationsSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207