Continuous Average Straightness in Spatial Graphs

The Straightness is a measure designed to characterize a pair of vertices in a spatial graph. It is defined as the ratio of the Euclidean distance to the graph distance between these vertices. It is often used as an average, for instance to describe the accessibility of a single vertex relatively to all the other vertices in the graph, or even to summarize the graph as a whole. In some cases, one needs to process the Straightness between not only vertices, but also any other points constituting the graph of interest. Suppose for instance that our graph represents a road network and we do not want to limit ourselves to crossroad-to-crossroad itineraries, but allow any street number to be a starting point or destination. In this situation, the standard approach consists in: 1) discretizing the graph edges, 2) processing the vertex-to-vertex Straightness considering the additional vertices resulting from this discretization, and 3) performing the appropriate average on the obtained values. However, this discrete approximation can be computationally expensive on large graphs, and its precision has not been clearly assessed. In this article, we adopt a continuous approach to average the Straightness over the edges of spatial graphs. This allows us to derive 5 distinct measures able to characterize precisely the accessibility of the whole graph, as well as individual vertices and edges. Our method is generic and could be applied to other measures designed for spatial graphs. We perform an experimental evaluation of our continuous average Straightness measures, and show how they behave differently from the traditional vertex-to-vertex ones. Moreover, we also study their discrete approximations, and show that our approach is globally less demanding in terms of both processing time and memory usage. Our R source code is publicly available under an open source license

Accuracy Measures for the Comparison of Classifiers

The selection of the best classification algorithm for a given dataset is a very widespread problem. It is also a complex one, in the sense it requires to make several important methodological choices. Among them, in this work we focus on the measure used to assess the classification performance and rank the algorithms. We present the most popular measures and discuss their properties. Despite the numerous measures proposed over the years, many of them turn out to be equivalent in this specific case, to have interpretation problems, or to be unsuitable for our purpose. Consequently, classic overall success rate or marginal rates should be preferred for this specific task.Comment: The 5th International Conference on Information Technology, amman : Jordanie (2011

Evaluation of Performance Measures for Classifiers Comparison

The selection of the best classification algorithm for a given dataset is a very widespread problem, occuring each time one has to choose a classifier to solve a real-world problem. It is also a complex task with many important methodological decisions to make. Among those, one of the most crucial is the choice of an appropriate measure in order to properly assess the classification performance and rank the algorithms. In this article, we focus on this specific task. We present the most popular measures and compare their behavior through discrimination plots. We then discuss their properties from a more theoretical perspective. It turns out several of them are equivalent for classifiers comparison purposes. Futhermore. they can also lead to interpretation problems. Among the numerous measures proposed over the years, it appears that the classical overall success rate and marginal rates are the more suitable for classifier comparison task

Opinion-Based Centrality in Multiplex Networks: A Convex Optimization Approach

Most people simultaneously belong to several distinct social networks, in which their relations can be different. They have opinions about certain topics, which they share and spread on these networks, and are influenced by the opinions of other persons. In this paper, we build upon this observation to propose a new nodal centrality measure for multiplex networks. Our measure, called Opinion centrality, is based on a stochastic model representing opinion propagation dynamics in such a network. We formulate an optimization problem consisting in maximizing the opinion of the whole network when controlling an external influence able to affect each node individually. We find a mathematical closed form of this problem, and use its solution to derive our centrality measure. According to the opinion centrality, the more a node is worth investing external influence, and the more it is central. We perform an empirical study of the proposed centrality over a toy network, as well as a collection of real-world networks. Our measure is generally negatively correlated with existing multiplex centrality measures, and highlights different types of nodes, accordingly to its definition

Introduction to the special issue on Graph and Network Analysis

International audienceThis fifth issue of the Journal of Interdisciplinary Methodologies and Issues in Science (JIMIS) is dedicated to methods designed for the analysis of graphs and networks, as well as to applied works relying on the analysis of graphs and networks in specific domains. It can be considered as a follow-up of the second issue of JIMIS, which focused on the modeling of social systems through graphs. Like before, it includes strongly interdisciplinary works. In addition, this issue widens the scope of the considered problems and systems, as the focus is not only on social systems anymore

Comparative Evaluation of Community Detection Algorithms: A Topological Approach

Community detection is one of the most active fields in complex networks analysis, due to its potential value in practical applications. Many works inspired by different paradigms are devoted to the development of algorithmic solutions allowing to reveal the network structure in such cohesive subgroups. Comparative studies reported in the literature usually rely on a performance measure considering the community structure as a partition (Rand Index, Normalized Mutual information, etc.). However, this type of comparison neglects the topological properties of the communities. In this article, we present a comprehensive comparative study of a representative set of community detection methods, in which we adopt both types of evaluation. Community-oriented topological measures are used to qualify the communities and evaluate their deviation from the reference structure. In order to mimic real-world systems, we use artificially generated realistic networks. It turns out there is no equivalence between both approaches: a high performance does not necessarily correspond to correct topological properties, and vice-versa. They can therefore be considered as complementary, and we recommend applying both of them in order to perform a complete and accurate assessment

Business-oriented Analysis of a Social Network of University Students

Despites the great interest caused by social networks in Business Science, their analysis is rarely performed both in a global and systematic way in this field: most authors focus on parts of the studied network, or on a few nodes considered individually. This could be explained by the fact that practical extraction of social networks is a difficult and costly task, since the specific relational data it requires are often difficult to access and thereby expensive. One may ask if equivalent information could be extracted from less expensive individual data, i.e. data concerning single individuals instead of several ones. In this work, we try to tackle this problem through group detection. We gather both types of data from a population of students, and estimate groups separately using individual and relational data, leading to sets of clusters and communities, respectively. We found out there is no strong overlapping between them, meaning both types of data do not convey the same information in this specific context, and can therefore be considered as complementary. However, a link, even if weak, exists and appears when we identify the most discriminant attributes relatively to the communities. Implications in Business Science include community prediction using individual data.Social Networks; Business Science; Cluster Analysis; Community Detection; Community Comparison; Individual Data; Relational Data

Generalized Measures for the Evaluation of Community Detection Methods

Community detection can be considered as a variant of cluster analysis applied to complex networks. For this reason, all existing studies have been using tools derived from this field when evaluating community detection algorithms. However, those are not completely relevant in the context of network analysis, because they ignore an essential part of the available information: the network structure. Therefore, they can lead to incorrect interpretations. In this article, we review these measures, and illustrate this limitation. We propose a modification to solve this problem, and apply it to the three most widespread measures: purity, Rand index and normalized mutual information (NMI). We then perform an experimental evaluation on artificially generated networks with realistic community structure. We assess the relevance of the modified measures by comparison with their traditional counterparts, and also relatively to the topological properties of the community structures. On these data, the modified NMI turns out to provide the most relevant results.Comment: The R source code (based on the igraph library) for the measures described in this article is freely available on GitHub:https://github.com/CompNet/TopoMeasure