The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Performance of modularity maximization in practical contexts
Open accessAbstract
Although widely used in practice, the behavior and accuracy of the popular module identification technique called modularity maximization is not well understood in practical contexts. Here, we present a broad characterization of its performance in such situations. First, we revisit and clarify the resolution limit phenomenon for modularity maximization. Second, we show that the modularity function Q exhibits extreme degeneracies: it typically admits an exponential number of distinct high-scoring solutions and typically lacks a clear global maximum. Third, we derive the limiting behavior of the maximum modularity Qmax for one model of infinitely modular networks, showing that it depends strongly both on the size of the network and on the number of modules it contains. Finally, using three real-world metabolic networks as examples, we show that the degenerate solutions can fundamentally disagree on many, but not all, partition properties such as the composition of the largest modules and the distribution of module sizes. These results imply that the output of any modularity maximization procedure should be interpreted cautiously in scientific contexts. They also explain why many heuristics are often successful at finding high-scoring partitions in practice and why different heuristics can disagree on the modular structure of the same network. We conclude by discussing avenues for mitigating some of these behaviors, such as combining information from many degenerate solutions or using generative models.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“One recent study has shown that, even in relatively small networks, a large number of good solutions exist for the standard modularity criterion [51], [52].”
From Spatial Guilds in the Serengeti Food Web Revealed by a Bayesian Group Model (2011) · cites this paper as [52]
In the citing paper
“However, as of today, a common method for dealing with this degeneracy is to examine statistics averaged over the 100 repetitions of the optimization, with equal weight being placed on each solution, rather than just on the unique solutions.”
From Dynamic reconfiguration of frontal brain networks during executive cognition in humans (2015) · cites this paper as [51]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1979) · Cited by 43,841
Fast unfolding of communities in large networks
Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008) · Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment · doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/p10008 · Cited by 21,424
The Structure and Function of Complex Networks
Newman, M. E. J. (2003) · SIAM Review · doi:10.1137/s003614450342480 · Cited by 18,719
Numerical recipes in C: the art of scientific computing
(1993) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.30-5638 · Cited by 17,933
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 19
(2007) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.52202/085713 · Cited by 16,043
Community structure in social and biological networks
Girvan, M., & Newman, M. E. J. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.122653799 · Cited by 15,502
Finding and evaluating community structure in networks
Newman, M. E. J., & Girvan, M. (2004) · Physical Review E · doi:10.1103/physreve.69.026113 · Cited by 13,931
Modularity and community structure in networks
Newman, M. E. J. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0601602103 · Cited by 12,256
Fortunato, S. (2010) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2009.11.002 · Cited by 11,293
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- M. A. Porter, 2009, Not. Am. Math. Soc., 59, 1082
- L. K. Branting, Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Social Network Mining and Analysis
- E. M. Airoldi, 2008, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 9, 1981
- P. Demartines, 1995, Proceedings of 15th workshop GRETSI. Juan-Les-Pins France
Cited by
Sorted by citations
From Louvain to Leiden: guaranteeing well-connected communities
Traag, V. A., Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-41695-z · Cited by 5,635
Newman, M. E. J. (2018) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198805090.001.0001 · Cited by 2,453
Community Structure in Time-Dependent, Multiscale, and Multiplex Networks
Mucha, P. J., Richardson, T., Macon, K., Porter, M. A., & Onnela, J.-P. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1184819 · Cited by 2,123
Community detection in networks: a user guide
Fortunato, S., & Hric, D. (2016) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.09.002 · Cited by 2,086
Dynamic reconfiguration of human brain networks during learning
Bassett, D. S., Wymbs, N. F., Porter, M. A., Mucha, P. J., Carlson, J. M., & Grafton, S. T. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1018985108 · Cited by 1,705
Metadata
- Authors
- Good, B. H., de Montjoye, Y.-A., & Clauset, A.
- Affiliations
- Swarthmore College (US)
- Santa Fe Institute (US)
- Venue
- Physical Review E
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2010-04-15
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 046106-046106
- ISSN
- 1539-3755 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-2376
- OpenAlex
- W2061099285
- Cited by
- 937
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 57 · 2018: 94 · 2017: 76 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 71 · 2014: 80 · 2013: 79 · 2012: 70
- FWCI
- 52.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Physical Review E (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Clustering Algorithms Research
- Keywords
- modularity optimization, resolution limit, network module identification, degenerate solutions, modularity function, metabolic networks, community detection
- MeSH terms
- Models, Theoretical
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
