2019
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224307
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clustering via hypergraph modularity

Abstract: Despite the fact that many important problems (including clustering) can be described using hypergraphs, theoretical foundations as well as practical algorithms using hypergraphs are not well developed yet. In this paper, we propose a hypergraph modularity function that generalizes its well established and widely used graph counterpart measure of how clustered a network is. In order to define it properly, we generalize the Chung-Lu model for graphs to hypergraphs. We then provide the theoretical foundations to… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
69
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
(34 reference statements)
0
69
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While these models were inspired from their graph counterparts and named as such, there may be multiple ways of conceiving these models in the hypergraph/bicolored graph setting, as is often the case with graph-to-hypergraph extensions. In fact, others have proposed non-uniform hypergraph analogs of Erdős-Rényi and Chung-Lu (see [8] and [71], respectively) differing to those considered here with regard to the inputs required, the model itself, and the definition of hypergraph assumed.…”
Section: Comparison With Generative Hypergraph Null Modelsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…While these models were inspired from their graph counterparts and named as such, there may be multiple ways of conceiving these models in the hypergraph/bicolored graph setting, as is often the case with graph-to-hypergraph extensions. In fact, others have proposed non-uniform hypergraph analogs of Erdős-Rényi and Chung-Lu (see [8] and [71], respectively) differing to those considered here with regard to the inputs required, the model itself, and the definition of hypergraph assumed.…”
Section: Comparison With Generative Hypergraph Null Modelsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In comparison to their graph counterparts, generative hypergraph models are relatively few. While work on random uniform hypergraphs dates back to at least the 1970s, researchers have recently begun developing a wider variety of hypergraph models, both for uniform hypergraphs [38][39][40]67] and non-uniform hypergraphs [8,[68][69][70][71]. We consider three generative hypergraph models from [65], which can be thought of as hypergraph interpretations of the graph models Erdős-Rényi (ER) [72], Chung-Lu (CL) [73], and Block Two-Level Erdős-Rényi (BTER) [74,75].…”
Section: Comparison With Generative Hypergraph Null Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many such extensions are possible. Unlike a recent proposal [23], we define a dyadic notion of modularity via null expectations for the weighted projected graph computed via Equation (7). While our approach loses some higher-order information in the modularity calculation, it has the benefit of allowing roles to be flexibly incorporated into the null expectation.…”
Section: Modularity and Community Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 3 contains the modularity values for the 6 different partitions evaluated. To calculate the modularity, we used the approach presented in [44] and implemented in SimpleHypergraphs.jl (see Section 3.4).…”
Section: Exploring and Analyzing User Reviews: Yelpcommentioning
confidence: 99%