Different approaches to community detection

A precise definition of what constitutes a community in networks has remained elusive. Consequently, network scientists have compared community detection algorithms on benchmark networks with a particular form of community structure and classified them based on the mathematical techniques they employ. However, this comparison can be misleading because apparent similarities in their mathematical machinery can disguise different reasons for why we would want to employ community detection in the first place. Here we provide a focused review of these different motivations that underpin community detection. This problem-driven classification is useful in applied network science, where it is important to select an appropriate algorithm for the given purpose. Moreover, highlighting the different approaches to community detection also delineates the many lines of research and points out open directions and avenues for future research.Comment: 14 pages, 2 figures. Written as a chapter for forthcoming Advances in network clustering and blockmodeling, and based on an extended version of The many facets of community detection in complex networks, Appl. Netw. Sci. 2: 4 (2017) by the same author

Statistical Network Analysis for Functional MRI: Summary Networks and Group Comparisons

Comparing weighted networks in neuroscience is hard, because the topological properties of a given network are necessarily dependent on the number of edges of that network. This problem arises in the analysis of both weighted and unweighted networks. The term density is often used in this context, in order to refer to the mean edge weight of a weighted network, or to the number of edges in an unweighted one. Comparing families of networks is therefore statistically difficult because differences in topology are necessarily associated with differences in density. In this review paper, we consider this problem from two different perspectives, which include (i) the construction of summary networks, such as how to compute and visualize the mean network from a sample of network-valued data points; and (ii) how to test for topological differences, when two families of networks also exhibit significant differences in density. In the first instance, we show that the issue of summarizing a family of networks can be conducted by adopting a mass-univariate approach, which produces a statistical parametric network (SPN). In the second part of this review, we then highlight the inherent problems associated with the comparison of topological functions of families of networks that differ in density. In particular, we show that a wide range of topological summaries, such as global efficiency and network modularity are highly sensitive to differences in density. Moreover, these problems are not restricted to unweighted metrics, as we demonstrate that the same issues remain present when considering the weighted versions of these metrics. We conclude by encouraging caution, when reporting such statistical comparisons, and by emphasizing the importance of constructing summary networks.Comment: 16 pages, 5 figure

Modeling Information Propagation with Survival Theory

Networks provide a skeleton for the spread of contagions, like, information, ideas, behaviors and diseases. Many times networks over which contagions diffuse are unobserved and need to be inferred. Here we apply survival theory to develop general additive and multiplicative risk models under which the network inference problems can be solved efficiently by exploiting their convexity. Our additive risk model generalizes several existing network inference models. We show all these models are particular cases of our more general model. Our multiplicative model allows for modeling scenarios in which a node can either increase or decrease the risk of activation of another node, in contrast with previous approaches, which consider only positive risk increments. We evaluate the performance of our network inference algorithms on large synthetic and real cascade datasets, and show that our models are able to predict the length and duration of cascades in real data.Comment: To appear at ICML '1

Structure Learning in Coupled Dynamical Systems and Dynamic Causal Modelling

Identifying a coupled dynamical system out of many plausible candidates, each of which could serve as the underlying generator of some observed measurements, is a profoundly ill posed problem that commonly arises when modelling real world phenomena. In this review, we detail a set of statistical procedures for inferring the structure of nonlinear coupled dynamical systems (structure learning), which has proved useful in neuroscience research. A key focus here is the comparison of competing models of (ie, hypotheses about) network architectures and implicit coupling functions in terms of their Bayesian model evidence. These methods are collectively referred to as dynamical casual modelling (DCM). We focus on a relatively new approach that is proving remarkably useful; namely, Bayesian model reduction (BMR), which enables rapid evaluation and comparison of models that differ in their network architecture. We illustrate the usefulness of these techniques through modelling neurovascular coupling (cellular pathways linking neuronal and vascular systems), whose function is an active focus of research in neurobiology and the imaging of coupled neuronal systems

Computational strategies for dissecting the high-dimensional complexity of adaptive immune repertoires

The adaptive immune system recognizes antigens via an immense array of antigen-binding antibodies and T-cell receptors, the immune repertoire. The interrogation of immune repertoires is of high relevance for understanding the adaptive immune response in disease and infection (e.g., autoimmunity, cancer, HIV). Adaptive immune receptor repertoire sequencing (AIRR-seq) has driven the quantitative and molecular-level profiling of immune repertoires thereby revealing the high-dimensional complexity of the immune receptor sequence landscape. Several methods for the computational and statistical analysis of large-scale AIRR-seq data have been developed to resolve immune repertoire complexity in order to understand the dynamics of adaptive immunity. Here, we review the current research on (i) diversity, (ii) clustering and network, (iii) phylogenetic and (iv) machine learning methods applied to dissect, quantify and compare the architecture, evolution, and specificity of immune repertoires. We summarize outstanding questions in computational immunology and propose future directions for systems immunology towards coupling AIRR-seq with the computational discovery of immunotherapeutics, vaccines, and immunodiagnostics.Comment: 27 pages, 2 figure

HypTrails: A Bayesian Approach for Comparing Hypotheses About Human Trails on the Web

When users interact with the Web today, they leave sequential digital trails on a massive scale. Examples of such human trails include Web navigation, sequences of online restaurant reviews, or online music play lists. Understanding the factors that drive the production of these trails can be useful for e.g., improving underlying network structures, predicting user clicks or enhancing recommendations. In this work, we present a general approach called HypTrails for comparing a set of hypotheses about human trails on the Web, where hypotheses represent beliefs about transitions between states. Our approach utilizes Markov chain models with Bayesian inference. The main idea is to incorporate hypotheses as informative Dirichlet priors and to leverage the sensitivity of Bayes factors on the prior for comparing hypotheses with each other. For eliciting Dirichlet priors from hypotheses, we present an adaption of the so-called (trial) roulette method. We demonstrate the general mechanics and applicability of HypTrails by performing experiments with (i) synthetic trails for which we control the mechanisms that have produced them and (ii) empirical trails stemming from different domains including website navigation, business reviews and online music played. Our work expands the repertoire of methods available for studying human trails on the Web.Comment: Published in the proceedings of WWW'1