Discovering communities in complex networks means grouping nodes similar to each other, to uncover latent information about them. There are hundreds of different algorithms to solve the community detection task, each with its own understanding and definition of what a "community" is. Dozens of review works attempt to order such a diverse landscape -- classifying community discovery algorithms by the process they employ to detect communities, by their explicitly stated definition of community, or by their performance on a standardized task. In this paper, we classify community discovery algorithms according to a fourth criterion: the similarity of their results. We create an Algorithm Similarity Network (ASN), whose nodes are the community detection approaches, connected if they return similar groupings. We then perform community detection on this network, grouping algorithms that consistently return the same partitions or overlapping coverage over a span of more than one thousand synthetic and real world networks. This paper is an attempt to create a similarity-based classification of community detection algorithms based on empirical data. It improves over the state of the art by comparing more than seventy approaches, discovering that the ASN contains well-separated groups, making it a sensible tool for practitioners, aiding their choice of algorithms fitting their analytic needs.
The second category includes works classifying community discovery algorithms by the of community they are searching for in the network. Notable definition-based review works are @cite_13 , @cite_30 , @cite_22 , @cite_6 , and @cite_32 , the latter three focusing on directed, overlapping, and evolving networks. This is the closest category to ours, as we are also interested in building an ontology of community discovery algorithms. However, the works in this category employ a top-down approach. They take the stated -- theoretical -- definition of community of a paper and use it to classify it. Here, we have a data-driven approach: we classify algorithms not by their stated definition, but by their practical results.
@cite_30 @cite_22 @cite_32 @cite_6 @cite_13
2157527521 2152430833 2734601503 2964273740
Many real-world networks are intimately organized according to a community structure. Much research effort has been devoted to develop methods and algorithms that can efficiently highlight this hidden structure of a network, yielding a vast literature on what is called today community detection. Since network representation can be very complex and can contain different variants in the traditional graph model, each algorithm in the literature focuses on some of these properties and establishes, explicitly or implicitly, its own definition of community. According to this definition, each proposed algorithm then extracts the communities, which typically reflect only part of the features of real communities. The aim of this survey is to provide a ‘user manual’ for the community discovery problem. Given a meta definition of what a community in a social network is, our aim is to organize the main categories of community discovery methods based on the definition of community they adopt. Given a desired definition of community and the features of a problem (size of network, direction of edges, multidimensionality, and so on) this review paper is designed to provide a set of approaches that researchers could focus on. The proposed classification of community discovery methods is also useful for putting into perspective the many open directions for further research. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Statistical Analysis and Data Mining 4: 512–546, 2011 © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 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. In a document network such as a citation network of scientific documents, web-logs, etc., the content produced by authors exhibits their interest in certain topics. In addition some authors influence other authors' interests. In this work, we propose to model the influence of cited authors along with the interests of citing authors. Moreover, we hypothesize that apart from the citations present in documents, the context surrounding the citation mention provides extra topical information about the cited authors. However, associating terms in the context to the cited authors remains an open problem. We propose novel document generation schemes that incorporate the context while simultaneously modeling the interests of citing authors and influence of the cited authors. Our experiments show significant improvements over baseline models for various evaluation criteria such as link prediction between document and cited author, and quantitatively explaining unseen text. A citing sentence is one that appears in a scientific article and cites previous work. Citing sentences have been studied and used in many applications. For example, they have been used in scientific paper summarization, automatic survey generation, paraphrase identification, and citation function classification. Citing sentences that cite multiple papers are common in scientific writing. This observation should be taken into consideration when using citing sentences in applications. For instance, when a citing sentence is used in a summary of a scientific paper, only the fragments of the sentence that are relevant to the summarized paper should be included in the summary. In this paper, we present and compare three different approaches for identifying the fragments of a citing sentence that are related to a given target reference. Our methods are: word classification, sequence labeling, and segment classification. Our experiments show that segment classification achieves the best results.