Identifying communities by influence dynamics in social networks

Communities are not static; they evolve, split and merge, appear and disappear, i.e., they are the product of dynamical processes that govern the evolution of a network. A good algorithm for community detection should not only quantify the topology of the network but incorporate the dynamical processes that take place on the network. We present an algorithm for community detection that combines network structure with processes that support the creation and/or evolution of communities. The algorithm does not embrace the universal approach but instead tries to focus on social networks and model dynamic social interactions that occur on those networks. It identifies leaders and communities that form around those leaders. It naturally supports overlapping communities by associating each node with a membership vector that describes the node's involvement in each community. This way, in addition to the overlapping communities, we can identify nodes that are good followers of their leader and also nodes with no clear community involvement that serve as proxies between several communities and that are equally as important. We run the algorithm for several real social networks which we believe represent a good fraction of the wide body of social networks and discuss the results, including other possible applications.

[1]  W. Zachary,et al.  An Information Flow Model for Conflict and Fission in Small Groups , 1977, Journal of Anthropological Research.

[2]  Edward M. Reingold,et al.  Graph drawing by force‐directed placement , 1991, Softw. Pract. Exp..

[3]  Judd Harrison Michael,et al.  Modeling the communication network in a sawmill , 1997 .

[4]  Judd Harrison Michael,et al.  Labor dispute reconciliation in a forest products manufacturing facility , 1997 .

[5]  加藤 賢.  E-Print の進化 , 2000 .

[6]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Hierarchical Organization of Modularity in Metabolic Networks , 2002, Science.

[7]  David Lusseau,et al.  The emergent properties of a dolphin social network , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[8]  D. Lusseau,et al.  The bottlenose dolphin community of Doubtful Sound features a large proportion of long-lasting associations , 2003, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[9]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  The Structure and Function of Complex Networks , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[10]  M. Newman,et al.  Identifying the role that animals play in their social networks , 2004, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[11]  M. Newman,et al.  Finding community structure in very large networks. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[12]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[13]  A. Arenas,et al.  Community detection in complex networks using extremal optimization. , 2005, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[14]  T. Vicsek,et al.  Uncovering the overlapping community structure of complex networks in nature and society , 2005, Nature.

[15]  M E J Newman,et al.  Modularity and community structure in networks. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  K. Kaski,et al.  Limited resolution in complex network community detection with Potts model approach , 2006 .

[17]  S. Fortunato,et al.  Resolution limit in community detection , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[18]  D. Lusseau.  Why Are Male Social Relationships Complex in the Doubtful Sound Bottlenose Dolphin Population? , 2007, PloS one.

[19]  Roger Guimerà,et al.  Extracting the hierarchical organization of complex systems , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[20]  Robert D. Kleinberg.  Geographic Routing Using Hyperbolic Space , 2007, IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.

[21]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Quantifying social group evolution , 2007, Nature.

[22]  M. Newman,et al.  Hierarchical structure and the prediction of missing links in networks , 2008, Nature.

[23]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  Dynamics of large networks , 2008 .

[24]  F. Radicchi,et al.  Benchmark graphs for testing community detection algorithms. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[25]  Martin Rosvall,et al.  Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[26]  N. Christakis,et al.  A Model of Genetic Variation in Human Social Networks , 2010 .

[27]  Santo Fortunato,et al.  Community detection in graphs , 2009, ArXiv.

[28]  Robin Palotai,et al.  Community Landscapes: An Integrative Approach to Determine Overlapping Network Module Hierarchy, Identify Key Nodes and Predict Network Dynamics , 2009, PloS one.

[29]  Benjamin H. Good,et al.  Performance of modularity maximization in practical contexts. , 2009, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[30]  Sune Lehmann,et al.  Link communities reveal multiscale complexity in networks , 2009, Nature.

[31]  Mark Newman,et al.  Networks: An Introduction , 2010 .

[32]  Jonathan W. Berry,et al.  Tolerating the community detection resolution limit with edge weighting. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.