4.7 Article

Taxonomies of networks from community structure

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW E
Volume 86, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.86.036104

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Fulbright Program
  2. NIH [P01 AG-031093]
  3. James S. McDonnell Foundation [220020177]
  4. NSF [DMS-0645369]
  5. EPSRC [EP/I005765/1, EP/I005986/1]
  6. BBSRC [BBD0201901]
  7. EPSRC [EP/I005765/1, EP/I005986/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  8. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/I005986/1, EP/I005765/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study of networks has become a substantial interdisciplinary endeavor that encompasses myriad disciplines in the natural, social, and information sciences. Here we introduce a framework for constructing taxonomies of networks based on their structural similarities. These networks can arise from any of numerous sources: They can be empirical or synthetic, they can arise from multiple realizations of a single process (either empirical or synthetic), they can represent entirely different systems in different disciplines, etc. Because mesoscopic properties of networks are hypothesized to be important for network function, we base our comparisons on summaries of network community structures. Although we use a specific method for uncovering network communities, much of the introduced framework is independent of that choice. After introducing the framework, we apply it to construct a taxonomy for 746 networks and demonstrate that our approach usefully identifies similar networks. We also construct taxonomies within individual categories of networks, and we thereby expose nontrivial structure. For example, we create taxonomies for similarity networks constructed from both political voting data and financial data. We also construct network taxonomies to compare the social structures of 100 Facebook networks and the growth structures produced by different types of fungi.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available