A simulated annealing algorithm for randomizing weighted networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scientific discovery in connectomics relies on the use of network null models. To systematically evaluate the prominence of brain network features, empirical measures are compared against null statistics computed in randomized networks. Modern imaging and tracing technologies provide an increasingly rich repertoire of biologically meaningful edge weights. Despite the prevalence of weighted graph analysis in connectomics, randomization models that only preserve binary node degree remain most widely used. Here, to adapt network null models to weighted network inference, we propose a simulated annealing procedure for generating strength sequence-preserving randomized networks. This model outperforms other commonly used rewiring algorithms in preserving weighted degree (strength). We show that these results generalize to directed networks as well as a wide range of real-world networks, making them generically applicable in neuroscience and in other scientific disciplines. Furthermore, we introduce morphospace representation as a tool for the assessment of null network ensemble variability and feature preservation. Finally, we show how the choice of a network null model can yield fundamentally different inferences about established organizational features of the brain such as the rich-club phenomenon and lay out best practices for the use of rewiring algorithms in brain network inference. Collectively, this work provides a simple but powerful inferential method to meet the challenges of analyzing richly detailed next-generation connectomics datasets.
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 | 0.010 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".