A network community structure similarity index for weighted networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identification of communities in complex systems is an essential part of network analysis. Accordingly, measuring similarities between communities is a fundamental part of analysing community structure in different, yet related, networks. Commonly used methods for quantifying network community similarity fail to consider the effects of edge weights. Existing methods remain limited when the two networks being compared have different numbers of nodes. In this study, we address these issues by proposing a novel network community structure similarity index (NCSSI) based on the edit distance concept. NCSSI is proposed as a similarity index for comparing network communities. The NCSSI incorporates both community labels and edge weights. The NCSSI can also be employed to assess the similarity between two communities with varying numbers of nodes. We test the proposed method using simulated data and case-study analysis of New York Yellow Taxi flows and compare the results with that of other commonly used methods (i.e., mutual information and the Jaccard index). Our results highlight how NCSSI effectively captures the impact of both label and edge weight changes and their impacts on community structure, which are not captured in existing approaches. In conclusion, NCSSI offers a new approach that incorporates both label and weight variations for community similarity measurement in complex networks.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".