A simulated annealing algorithm for randomizing weighted networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scientific discovery in connectomics relies on network null models. The prominence of network features is conventionally evaluated against null distributions estimated using randomized networks. Modern imaging technologies provide an increasingly rich array 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 we propose a simulated annealing procedure for generating randomized networks that preserve weighted degree (strength) sequences. We show that the procedure outperforms other rewiring algorithms and generalizes to multiple network formats, including directed and signed networks, as well as diverse real-world networks. Throughout, we use morphospace representation to assess the sampling behavior of the algorithm and the variability of the resulting ensemble. Finally, we show that accurate strength preservation yields different inferences about brain network organization. Collectively, this work provides a simple but powerful method to analyze 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it