Print

Print


*****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org  *****

John,

I'm not sure what you mean by 'lumpier', but let me just make the generic 
comment that one _expects_ different methods in which a complicated 
optimization landscape is involved to give different results.  There is an 
extensive discussion in the following paper (in the context of modularity 
optimization, including with Louvain):

 	http://pre.aps.org/abstract/PRE/v81/i4/e046106



I have never played with VOS, but in my googling to figure out what that 
is, I found this web page (which seems concerned with rather similar 
issues as what you raise):

 	http://mrvar.fdv.uni-lj.si/pajek/community/LouvainVOS.htm



------
Mason





On Mon, 5 Aug 2013, SOCNET automatic digest system wrote:

> There is 1 message totalling 363 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
>  1. Louvain vs VOS Community Detection
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
> network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
> an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
> UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date:    Mon, 5 Aug 2013 10:58:35 +0900
> From:    John McCreery <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Louvain vs VOS Community Detection
>
> --047d7b5d6592708e4304e329a524
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> *****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org  *****
>
> Two recent runs through part of my data using the Pajek commands for,
> first, VOS and, second, Louvain community detection. My question is why the
> results using the Louvain method seem lumpier than those using the VOS
> method. Note, for example, that cluster 1 in the VOS distribution has 36
> members, while cluster 1 using the Louvain method has 97. Using the VOS
> method, cluster 11 has 35 members, while cluster 11 using the Louvain
> method has 101. Is there a straightforward explanation why the two
> algorithms produce such apparently different results? Or is this just a
> random event?
>
> Thoughts?



-----
Mason

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Mason A. Porter
  University Lecturer
  Oxford Centre for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
  Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford

  Homepage: http://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/porterm/
  Blog: http://masonporter.blogspot.com/
  Twitter: @masonporter
  Skype: tepid451
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  "Few things are deadlier than me armed with a red pen." (Me)
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

_____________________________________________________________________
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.