The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Empirical comparison of algorithms for network community detection
Abstract
Detecting clusters or communities in large real-world graphs such as large social or information networks is a problem of considerable interest. In practice, one typically chooses an objective function that captures the intuition of a network cluster as set of nodes with better internal connectivity than external connectivity, and then one applies approximation algorithms or heuristics to extract sets of nodes that are related to the objective function and that look like good communities for the application of interest.In this paper, we explore a range of network community detection methods in order to compare them and to understand their relative performance and the systematic biases in the clusters they identify. We evaluate several common objective functions that are used to formalize the notion of a network community, and we examine several different classes of approximation algorithms that aim to optimize such objective functions. In addition, rather than simply fixing an objective and asking for an approximation to the best cluster of any size, we consider a size-resolved version of the optimization problem. Considering community quality as a function of its size provides a much finer lens with which to examine community detection algorithms, since objective functions and approximation algorithms often have non-obvious size-dependent behavior.
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.
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
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
Resolution limit in community detection
Fortunato, S., & Barthélemy, M. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0605965104 · Cited by 3,024
Defining and identifying communities in networks
Radicchi, F., Castellano, C., Cecconi, F., Loreto, V., & Parisi, D. (2004) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0400054101 · Cited by 2,450
Local Graph Partitioning using PageRank Vectors
Andersen, R., Chung, F., & Lang, K. (2006) · 2006 47th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'06) · doi:10.1109/focs.2006.44 · Cited by 967
Self-citationRobustness of community structure in networks
Karrer, B., Levina, E., & Newman, M. E. J. (2008) · Physical Review E · doi:10.1103/physreve.77.046119 · Cited by 350
Cited by
Chen, M., Mao, S., & Liu, Y. (2014) · Mobile Networks and Applications · doi:10.1007/s11036-013-0489-0 · Cited by 2,913
Graph based anomaly detection and description: a survey
Akoglu, L., Tong, H., & Koutra, D. (2015) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-014-0365-y · Cited by 1,504
Toward Scalable Systems for Big Data Analytics: A Technology Tutorial
Hu, H., Wen, Y., Chua, T.-S., & Li, X. (2014) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2014.2332453 · Cited by 1,099
Leveraging social media networks for classification
Tang, L., & Liu, H. (2011) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-010-0210-x · Cited by 360
Efficient community detection in large networks using content and links
Ruan, Y., Fuhry, D., & Parthasarathy, S. (2013) · Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on World Wide Web · doi:10.1145/2488388.2488483 · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Leskovec, J., Lang, K. J., & Mahoney, M.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2010-04-26
- Pages
- 631-640
- OpenAlex
- W2111002549
- Cited by
- 918
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 44.98
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Empirical comparison of algorithms for network community detection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1772690.1772755
- The paper
- Leskovec, J., Lang, K. J., & Mahoney, M. (2010). Empirical comparison of algorithms for network community detection. Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web. https://doi.org/10.1145/1772690.1772755
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.