Exploring Mixed Membership Stochastic Block Models via Non-negative Matrix Factorization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many real-world phenomena can be modeled by networks in which entities and connections are represented by nodes and edges respectively. When certain nodes are highly connected with each other, those nodes forms a cluster, which is called community in our context. It is usually assumed that each node belongs to one community only, but evidences in biology and social networks reveal that the communities often overlap with each other. In other words, one node can probably belong to multiple communities. In light of that, mixed membership stochastic block models (MMB) have been developed to model those networks with overlapping communities. Such a model contains three matrices: two incidence matrices indicating in and out connections and one probability matrix. When the probability of connections for nodes between communities are significantly small, the parameter inference problem to this model can be solved by a constrained non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) algorithm. In this paper, we explore the connection between the two models and propose an algorithm based on NMF to infer the parameters of MMB. The proposed algorithms can detect overlapping communities regardless of knowing or not the number of communities. Experiments show that our algorithm can achieve a better community detection performance than the traditional NMF algorithm.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".