Cited by 13,931Complex Network Analysis TechniquesAdvanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

Finding and evaluating community structure in networks

Open access
Newman, M. E. J., Girvan, M.·2004·Physical Review E

Abstract

We propose and study a set of algorithms for discovering community structure in networks-natural divisions of network nodes into densely connected subgroups. Our algorithms all share two definitive features: first, they involve iterative removal of edges from the network to split it into communities, the edges removed being identified using any one of a number of possible "betweenness" measures, and second, these measures are, crucially, recalculated after each removal. We also propose a measure for the strength of the community structure found by our algorithms, which gives us an objective metric for choosing the number of communities into which a network should be divided. We demonstrate that our algorithms are highly effective at discovering community structure in both computer-generated and real-world network data, and show how they can be used to shed light on the sometimes dauntingly complex structure of networked systems.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physreve.69.026113

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • After PhenoGraph, the standard approach to clustering single-cell datasets has become multi-resolution modularity optimization as implemented in the Louvain algorithm on single-cell KNN graphs.

    “After the pioneering PhenoGraph method (Levine et al, 2015), the standard approach to clustering single‐cell datasets has become multi‐resolution modularity optimization (Newman & Girvan, 2004; Reichardt & Bornholdt, 2006) as implemented in the Louvain algorithm (Blondel et al, 2008) on single‐cell KNN graphs.”

    From Current best practices in single-cell RNA-seq analysis: a tutorial (2019) · cites this paper as Newman & Girvan, 2004

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 59 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [5]M. Faloutsos, P. Faloutsos, and C. Faloutsos, On powerlaw relationships of the internet topology. Computer Communications Review 29 , 251-262 (1999).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Newman, M. E. J., & Girvan, M.
Affiliations
Santa Fe Institute (US)
Venue
Physical Review E
Published
2004-02-26
Volume
69
Issue
2
Pages
026113-026113
ISSN
  • 1539-3755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-2376
OpenAlex
W2095293504
Cited by
13,931
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 370 · 2025: 648 · 2024: 663 · 2023: 685 · 2022: 816 · 2021: 872 · 2020: 880 · 2019: 963 · 2018: 988 · 2017: 803 · 2016: 888 · 2015: 781 · 2014: 844 · 2013: 787 · 2012: 655
FWCI
105.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review E (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Clustering Algorithms Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
community structure, network clustering, edge deletion, betweenness centrality, number of communities, network partitioning, complex networks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review