Abstract
Most real-world networks considered in the literature have a modular structure. Analysis of these real-world networks often are performed under the assumption that there is only one type of node. However, social and biochemical systems are often bipartite networks, meaning that there are two exclusive sets of nodes, and that edges run exclusively between nodes belonging to different sets. Here we address the issue of module detection in bipartite networks by comparing the performance of two classes of group identification methods – modularity maximization and clique percolation – on an ensemble of modular random bipartite networks. We find that the modularity maximization methods are able to reliably detect the modular bipartite structure, and that, under some conditions, the simulated annealing method outperforms the spectral decomposition method. We also find that the clique percolation methods are not capable of reliably detecting the modular bipartite structure of the bipartite model networks considered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
M.E.J. Newman, M. Girvan, Phys. Rev. E 69, 026113 (2004)
R. Guimerà, L.A.N. Amaral, J. Stat. Mech.: Theor. Exp., P02001 (2005)
D.J. Watts, P.S. Dodds, M.E.J. Newman, Science 296, 1302 (2002)
L. Donetti, M.A. Muñoz, J. Stat. Mech.: Theor. Exp., P10012 (2004)
R. Guimerà, M. Sales-Pardo, L.A.N. Amaral, Phys. Rev. E 70, 025101 (2004)
J. Reichardt, S. Bornholdt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 218701 (2004)
J. Duch, A. Arenas, Phys. Rev. E 72, 027104 (2005)
G. Palla, I. Derényi, I. Farkas, T. Vicsek, Nature 435, 814 (2005)
R. Guimerà, S. Mossa, A. Turtschi, L.A.N. Amaral, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102, 7794 (2005)
M. Sales-Pardo, R. Guimerà, A.A. Moreira, L.A.N. Amaral, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 15224 (2007)
R. Guimerà, M. Sales-Pardo, L.A.N. Amaral, Nature Phys. 3, 63 (2007)
M.E.J. Newman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 404 (2001)
K. Börner, J.T. Maru, R.L. Goldstone, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101, 5266 (2004)
R. Guimerà, B. Uzzi, J. Spiro, L.A.N. Amaral, Science 308, 697 (2005)
M.J. Stringer, M. Sales-Pardo, L.A.N. Amaral, PLoS ONE 3, e1683 (2008)
P. Uetz, L. Giot, G. Cagney, T.A. Mansfield, R.S. Judson, J.R. Knight, D. Lockshon, V. Narayan, M. Srinivasan, P. Pochart et al., Nature 403, 623 (2000)
H. Jeong, S.P. Mason, A.L. Barabási, Z.N. Oltvai, Nature 411, 41 (2001)
S. Maslov, K. Sneppen, Science 296, 910 (2002)
S. Li, C.M. Armstrong, N. Bertin, H. Ge, S. Milstein, M. Boxem, P.O. Vidalain, J.D.J. Han, A. Chesneau, T. Hao et al., Science 303, 540 (2004)
R. Guimerà, L.A.N. Amaral, Nature 433, 895 (2005)
M.J. Barber, Phys. Rev. E 76, 066102 (2007)
M.E.J. Newman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 8577 (2006)
S. Lehmann, M. Schwartz, L.K. Hansen, Phys. Rev. E 78,016108 (2008)
L. Danon, A. Díaz-Guilera, J. Duch, A. Arenas, J. Stat. Mech.: Theor. Exp., P09008 (2005)
E.N. Sawardecker, M. Sales-Pardo, L.A.N. Amaral, Eur. Phys. J. B 67, 277 (2009)
S. Fortunato, M. Barthélemy, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 36 (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sawardecker, E., Amundsen, C., Sales-Pardo, M. et al. Comparison of methods for the detection of node group membership in bipartite networks. Eur. Phys. J. B 72, 671–677 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2009-00397-6
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2009-00397-6