Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2017) 2017
DOI: 10.24251/hicss.2017.258
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Applications of Cohesive Subgraph Detection Algorithms to Analyzing Socio-Technical Networks

Abstract: Abstract

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Different options exist for detection of sessions in interaction graphs. If interaction is not clearly demarcated by periods of non-interaction and one wishes to discover clusters of high activity, we have found that cohesive subgraph detection or "community detection" algorithms (Fortunato, 2010) such as modularity partitioning (Blondel, Guillaume, Lambiotte, & Lefebvre, 2008) applied to uptake graphs are useful (Suthers, 2017). If (as in our Tapped In data) activity is distributed across rooms and the activity within a room almost always has periods of non-activity between sessions, sessions can be identified efficiently without needing to construct a contingency graph (it can be constructed later for other purposes).…”
Section: Identifying Sessions Of Interactionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different options exist for detection of sessions in interaction graphs. If interaction is not clearly demarcated by periods of non-interaction and one wishes to discover clusters of high activity, we have found that cohesive subgraph detection or "community detection" algorithms (Fortunato, 2010) such as modularity partitioning (Blondel, Guillaume, Lambiotte, & Lefebvre, 2008) applied to uptake graphs are useful (Suthers, 2017). If (as in our Tapped In data) activity is distributed across rooms and the activity within a room almost always has periods of non-activity between sessions, sessions can be identified efficiently without needing to construct a contingency graph (it can be constructed later for other purposes).…”
Section: Identifying Sessions Of Interactionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In SNA, a network is depicted using a set of nodes and ties (edges) among them (Marin & Wellman, 2010) network. Identification of cohesive subgraphs, commonly known as 'community detection', is used to identify groups of actors that connected with each other than others within networks (Suthers, 2017). Lambiotte, and Lefebvre (2008).…”
Section: Deviations From Basic Tenets Of Media Events: Polymorphism In Networked Eventsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One such algorithm is the Louvain method (Blondel, Guillaume, Lambiotte, & Lefebvre, 2008). The Louvain method performs well on benchmarks (Barabási, 2016) and can identify clusters that are interpretable in terms of social activity (Suthers, 2017;Suthers, Fusco, Schank, Chu, & Schlager, 2013). Another strong contender, InfoMap (Rosvall, Axelsson, & Bergstrom, 2009) is an information theoretic approach based on the metaphor of defining the most compact "map" to describe an ergodic random walk in the graph.…”
Section: Polymorphismmentioning
confidence: 99%