MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404238465 · doi:10.1109/tkde.2024.3496586

Finding Antagonistic Communities in Signed Uncertain Graphs

2024· article· en· W4404238465 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsComputer scienceSigned graphTheoretical computer scienceGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many real-world networks are signed networks with positive and negative edge weights, such as social networks with positive (friend) or negative (foe) relationships between users, and gene interaction networks with positive (stimulatory) or negative (inhibitory) interactions between genes. A well-known data mining task in signed networks is to find groups of antagonistic communities, where the vertices in the same community have a strong positive relationship and the vertices in different communities have a strong negative relationship. Most existing methods find antagonistic communities by modelling a signed network as a static graph with constant positive and negative edge weights. However, since the relationship between vertices is often uncertain in many real-world networks, it is more practical and accurate to capture the uncertainty of the relationship in the network by a signed uncertain graph (SUG), where each edge is independently associated with a discrete probability distribution of signed edge weights. How to find groups of antagonistic communities in a SUG is a challenging data mining task that has not been systematically tackled before. In this paper, we propose a novel method to tackle this task. We first model a group of antagonistic communities by a set of subgraphs, where the vertices in the same subgraph have a large expectation of positive edge weights and the vertices in different subgraphs have a large expectation of negative edge weights. Then, we propose a method to efficiently find significant groups of antagonistic communities by restricting all the computations on small local subgraphs of the SUG. Extensive experiments on seven real-world datasets and a synthetic dataset demonstrate the outstanding effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed method.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.246 · 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