IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/netsci/v8y2020is1ps145-s163_8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is it correct to project and detect? How weighting unipartite projections influences community detection

Author

Listed:
  • Cann, Tristan J. B.
  • Weaver, Iain S.
  • Williams, Hywel T. P.

Abstract

Bipartite networks represent pairwise relationships between nodes belonging to two distinct classes. While established methods exist for analyzing unipartite networks, those for bipartite network analysis are somewhat obscure and relatively less developed. Community detection in such instances is frequently approached by first projecting the network onto a unipartite network, a method where edges between node classes are encoded as edges within one class. Here we test seven different projection schemes by assessing the performance of community detection on both: (i) a real-world dataset from social media and (ii) an ensemble of artificial networks with prescribed community structure. A number of performance and accuracy issues become apparent from the experimental findings, especially in the case of long-tailed degree distributions. Of the methods tested, the “hyperbolic” projection scheme alleviates most of these difficulties and is thus the most robust scheme of those tested. We conclude that any interpretation of community detection algorithm performance on projected networks must be done with care as certain network configurations require strong community preference for the bipartite structure to be reflected in the unipartite communities. Our results have implications for the analysis of detected community structure in projected unipartite networks.

Suggested Citation

  • Cann, Tristan J. B. & Weaver, Iain S. & Williams, Hywel T. P., 2020. "Is it correct to project and detect? How weighting unipartite projections influences community detection," Network Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(S1), pages 145-163, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:netsci:v:8:y:2020:i:s1:p:s145-s163_8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2050124220000119/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:netsci:v:8:y:2020:i:s1:p:s145-s163_8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/nws .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.