Multilevel Graph Clustering with Density-Based Quality Measures

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$Eine Einführung in LaTeX-Beamer - studiy - Brandenburgische ...$

BIBLIOGRAPHY[42] H. Jeong, B. Tombor, R. Albert, Z. N Oltvai, and A. L Barabasi. The largescaleorganization of metabolic networks. cond-mat/0010278, October 2000.Nature, v407 651-654 (2000).[43] G. Karypis and V. Kumar. A fast and high quality multilevel scheme for partitioningirregular graphs. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 20(1):359,1998.[44] George Karypis and Vipin Kumar. Parallel multilevel k-way partitioning schemefor irregular graphs. SIAM Review, 41(2):278–300, 1999.[45] B.W. Kernighan and S. Lin. An efficient heuristic procedure for partitioninggraphs. Bell System Technical Journal, 49(2):291–307, 1970.[46] J. Kleinberg. An impossibility theorem for clustering. Advances in NeuralInformation Processing Systems 15: Proceedings of the 2002 Conference, 2003.[47] Valdis Krebs. A network of books about recent us politics sold by the onlinebookseller amazon.com. http://www.orgnet.com/.[48] R. Lehoucq, K. Maschhoff, D. Sorenson, and C. Yang.Arpack: An efficient portable large scale eigenvalue packagehttp://www.caam.rice.edu/software/arpack/, 1996.[49] László Lovász. Random walks on graphs: A survey. Combinatorics, Paul Erdosis Eighty, 2:1–46, 1993.[50] David Lusseau. Evidence for social role in a dolphin social network. q-bio/0607048, July 2006.[51] David Lusseau, Karsten Schneider, Oliver J. Boisseau, Patti Haase, ElisabethSlooten, and Steve M. Dawson. The bottlenose dolphin community of doubtfulsound features a large proportion of long-lasting associations. BehavioralEcology and Sociobiology, 54:396–405, 2003.[52] Claire P. Massen and Jonathan P. K. Doye. Identifying communities withinenergy landscapes. Physical Review E (Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft MatterPhysics), 71:046101–12, April 2005.[53] Ron Milo, Shalev Itzkovitz, Nadav Kashtan, Reuven Levitt, Shai Shen-Orr,Inbal Ayzenshtat, Michal Sheffer, and Uri Alon. Superfamilies of evolved anddesigned networks. Science, 303:1538–1542, March 2004.[54] Burkhard Monien, Robert Preis, and Ralf Diekmann. Quality matchingand local improvement for multilevel graph-partitioning. Parallel Computing,26:1609–1634, November 2000.[55] M. Müller-Hannemann and A. Schwartz. Implementing weighted b-matchingalgorithms: towards a flexible software design. J. Exp. Algorithmics, 4:7, 1999.96
BIBLIOGRAPHY[56] Newman. Detecting community structure in networks. The European PhysicalJournal B - Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, 38:321–330, March 2004.[57] J. Newman. Finding community structure in networks using the eigenvectorsof matrices. Physical Review E, 74(3):036104, 2006.[58] J. Newman. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings ofthe National Academy of Sciences, 103(23):8577, 2006.[59] J. Newman and M. Girvan. Finding and evaluating community structure innetworks. Physical Review E, 69(2):026113, 2004.[60] M. E. J. Newman. Fast algorithm for detecting community structure in networks.Physical Review E, 69:066133, June 2004.[61] MEJ Newman. From the Cover: The structure of scientific collaboration networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2):404, 2001.[62] Andreas Noack. Unified quality measures for clusterings, layouts, and orderingsof graphs, and their application as software design criteria. PhD thesis,Brandenburgische Technische Universität Cottbus, 2007.[63] P. Pons. Post-processing hierarchical community structures: Quality improvementsand multi-scale view. ArXiv Computer Science e-prints, cs.DS/0608050,2006.[64] Pascal Pons and Matthieu Latapy. Computing communities in large networksusing random walks (long version). physics/0512106, December 2005.[65] Josep M. Pujol, Javier Bejar, and Jordi Delgado. Clustering algorithm for determiningcommunity structure in large networks. Physical Review E (Statistical,Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics), 74:016107–9, July 2006.[66] Filippo Radicchi, Claudio Castellano, Federico Cecconi, Vittorio Loreto, andDomenico Parisi. Defining and identifying communities in networks. Proceedingsof the National Academy of Sciences, 101:2658–2663, March 2004.[67] Jorg Reichardt and Stefan Bornholdt. Statistical mechanics of community detection.Physical Review E (Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics),74(1):016110–14, 2006.[68] J?rg Reichardt and Stefan Bornholdt. Detecting fuzzy community structuresin complex networks with a potts model. Physical Review Letters, 93:218701,November 2004.[69] Jianhua Ruan and Weixiong Zhang. Identifying network communities with ahigh resolution. Physical Review E (Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft MatterPhysics), 77:016104–12, 2008.[70] J. Siek, L.Q. Lee, and A. Lumsdaine. The Boost Graph Library: User Guideand Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, 2002.97
Page 1:
Brandenburgische Technische Univers
Page 5 and 6:
ContentsList of FiguresList of Tabl
Page 7:
List of Figures1.1 Graph of the Mex
Page 11 and 12:
1 IntroductionSince the rise of com
Page 13 and 14:
1.2 Objectives and Outline1.2 Objec
Page 15 and 16:
2 Graph ClusteringThis chapter intr
Page 17 and 18:
2.2 The Modularity Measure of Newma
Page 19 and 20:
2.3 Density-Based Clustering Qualit
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
2.4 Fundamental Clustering Strategi
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
3 The Multi-Level Refinement Algori
Page 37 and 38:
3.1 The Multi-Level Schemeas starti
Page 39 and 40:
3.2 Graph CoarseningData: graph,sel
Page 41 and 42:
3.2 Graph Coarseningnearly no edges
Page 43 and 44:
3.3 Merge SelectorsExtent Name Desc
Page 45 and 46:
3.3 Merge Selectorsdifferent size.
Page 47 and 48:
3.3 Merge SelectorsThe probability
Page 49 and 50:
3.3 Merge SelectorsAs selection qua
Page 51 and 52:
3.3 Merge Selectorsvectors the eige
Page 53 and 54:
3.4 Cluster Refinementleave the loc
Page 55 and 56: 3.4 Cluster Refinementmoving v from
Page 57 and 58: 3.4 Cluster RefinementAlgorithm Sea
Page 59 and 60: 3.4 Cluster RefinementData: graph,c
Page 61 and 62: 3.4 Cluster RefinementModularity0.2
Page 63 and 64: 3.5 Further Implementation NotesInd
Page 65 and 66: 3.5 Further Implementation NotesBOO
Page 67: 3.5 Further Implementation Notesfor
Page 70 and 71: 4 Evaluationparameter component des
Page 72 and 73: 4 Evaluationsignificance scale also
Page 74 and 75: 4 EvaluationModularity by Match Fra
Page 76 and 77: 4 Evaluation5% 10% 30% 50% 100%G-no
Page 78 and 79: 4 Evaluationmean modularity0.50 0.5
Page 80 and 81: 4 Evaluation1 2 3 4RWreach-none 1 0
Page 82 and 83: 4 EvaluationG-none M-none G-sgrd M-
Page 84 and 85: 4 Evaluationmean modularity time DI
Page 86 and 87: 4 EvaluationRuntime vs. Graph SizeR
Page 88 and 89: 4 EvaluationComparison of Modularit
Page 90 and 91: 4 Evaluation(a) karate(b) dolphinsF
Page 92 and 93: 4 Evaluation(a) jazz(b) celegans me
Page 94 and 95: 4 Evaluationadministrators, and gra
Page 97 and 98: 5 Results and Future WorkThe object
Page 99 and 100: 5.3 Directions for Future Workstrat
Page 101: 5.3 Directions for Future Workties
Page 104 and 105: BIBLIOGRAPHY[14] B.L. Chamberlain.
Page 108 and 109: BIBLIOGRAPHY[71] A. J. Soper and C.
Page 110 and 111: A The Benchmark Graph Collectionsub
Page 112 and 113: B Clustering ResultsRWreach-sgrd 1
Page 114: B Clustering Resultswalktrap leadin
show all

Multilevel Graph Clustering with Density-Based Quality Measures

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?