Cargando…

Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale

OVERVIEW: Notions of community quality underlie the clustering of networks. While studies surrounding network clustering are increasingly common, a precise understanding of the realtionship between different cluster quality metrics is unknown. In this paper, we examine the relationship between stand...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Emmons, Scott, Kobourov, Stephen, Gallant, Mike, Börner, Katy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4938516/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27391786
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159161
_version_ 1782441869649641472
author Emmons, Scott
Kobourov, Stephen
Gallant, Mike
Börner, Katy
author_facet Emmons, Scott
Kobourov, Stephen
Gallant, Mike
Börner, Katy
author_sort Emmons, Scott
collection PubMed
description OVERVIEW: Notions of community quality underlie the clustering of networks. While studies surrounding network clustering are increasingly common, a precise understanding of the realtionship between different cluster quality metrics is unknown. In this paper, we examine the relationship between stand-alone cluster quality metrics and information recovery metrics through a rigorous analysis of four widely-used network clustering algorithms—Louvain, Infomap, label propagation, and smart local moving. We consider the stand-alone quality metrics of modularity, conductance, and coverage, and we consider the information recovery metrics of adjusted Rand score, normalized mutual information, and a variant of normalized mutual information used in previous work. Our study includes both synthetic graphs and empirical data sets of sizes varying from 1,000 to 1,000,000 nodes. CLUSTER QUALITY METRICS: We find significant differences among the results of the different cluster quality metrics. For example, clustering algorithms can return a value of 0.4 out of 1 on modularity but score 0 out of 1 on information recovery. We find conductance, though imperfect, to be the stand-alone quality metric that best indicates performance on the information recovery metrics. Additionally, our study shows that the variant of normalized mutual information used in previous work cannot be assumed to differ only slightly from traditional normalized mutual information. NETWORK CLUSTERING ALGORITHMS: Smart local moving is the overall best performing algorithm in our study, but discrepancies between cluster evaluation metrics prevent us from declaring it an absolutely superior algorithm. Interestingly, Louvain performed better than Infomap in nearly all the tests in our study, contradicting the results of previous work in which Infomap was superior to Louvain. We find that although label propagation performs poorly when clusters are less clearly defined, it scales efficiently and accurately to large graphs with well-defined clusters.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4938516
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49385162016-07-22 Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale Emmons, Scott Kobourov, Stephen Gallant, Mike Börner, Katy PLoS One Research Article OVERVIEW: Notions of community quality underlie the clustering of networks. While studies surrounding network clustering are increasingly common, a precise understanding of the realtionship between different cluster quality metrics is unknown. In this paper, we examine the relationship between stand-alone cluster quality metrics and information recovery metrics through a rigorous analysis of four widely-used network clustering algorithms—Louvain, Infomap, label propagation, and smart local moving. We consider the stand-alone quality metrics of modularity, conductance, and coverage, and we consider the information recovery metrics of adjusted Rand score, normalized mutual information, and a variant of normalized mutual information used in previous work. Our study includes both synthetic graphs and empirical data sets of sizes varying from 1,000 to 1,000,000 nodes. CLUSTER QUALITY METRICS: We find significant differences among the results of the different cluster quality metrics. For example, clustering algorithms can return a value of 0.4 out of 1 on modularity but score 0 out of 1 on information recovery. We find conductance, though imperfect, to be the stand-alone quality metric that best indicates performance on the information recovery metrics. Additionally, our study shows that the variant of normalized mutual information used in previous work cannot be assumed to differ only slightly from traditional normalized mutual information. NETWORK CLUSTERING ALGORITHMS: Smart local moving is the overall best performing algorithm in our study, but discrepancies between cluster evaluation metrics prevent us from declaring it an absolutely superior algorithm. Interestingly, Louvain performed better than Infomap in nearly all the tests in our study, contradicting the results of previous work in which Infomap was superior to Louvain. We find that although label propagation performs poorly when clusters are less clearly defined, it scales efficiently and accurately to large graphs with well-defined clusters. Public Library of Science 2016-07-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4938516/ /pubmed/27391786 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159161 Text en © 2016 Emmons et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Emmons, Scott
Kobourov, Stephen
Gallant, Mike
Börner, Katy
Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale
title Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale
title_full Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale
title_fullStr Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale
title_short Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale
title_sort analysis of network clustering algorithms and cluster quality metrics at scale
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4938516/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27391786
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159161
work_keys_str_mv AT emmonsscott analysisofnetworkclusteringalgorithmsandclusterqualitymetricsatscale
AT kobourovstephen analysisofnetworkclusteringalgorithmsandclusterqualitymetricsatscale
AT gallantmike analysisofnetworkclusteringalgorithmsandclusterqualitymetricsatscale
AT bornerkaty analysisofnetworkclusteringalgorithmsandclusterqualitymetricsatscale