Mutual information and the encoding of contingency tables

Mutual information is commonly used as a measure of similarity between competing labelings of a given set of objects, for example to quantify performance in classification and community detection tasks. As argued recently, however, the mutual information as conventionally defined can return biased results because it neglects the information cost of the so-called contingency table, a crucial component of the similarity calculation. In principle the bias can be rectified by subtracting the appropriate information cost, leading to the modified measure known as the reduced mutual information, but in practice one can only ever compute an upper bound on this information cost, and the value of the reduced mutual information depends crucially on how good a bound is established. In this paper we describe an improved method for encoding contingency tables that gives a substantially better bound in typical use cases, and approaches the ideal value in the common case where the labelings are closely similar, as we demonstrate with extensive numerical results.

Luck, skill, and depth of competition in games and social hierarchies

Patterns of wins and losses in pairwise contests, such as occur in sports and games, consumer research and paired comparison studies, and human and animal social hierarchies, are commonly analyzed using probabilistic models that allow one to quantify the strength of competitors or predict the outcome of future contests. Here we generalize this approach to incorporate two additional features: an element of randomness or luck that leads to upset wins, and a "depth of competition" variable that measures the complexity of a game or hierarchy. Fitting the resulting model to a large collection of data sets we estimate depth and luck in a range of games, sports, and social situations. In general, we find that social competition tends to be "deep," meaning it has a pronounced hierarchy with many distinct levels, but also that there is often a nonzero chance of an upset victory, meaning that dominance challenges can be won even by significant underdogs. Competition in sports and games, by contrast, tends to be shallow and in most cases there is little evidence of upset wins, beyond those already implied by the shallowness of the hierarchy.

Normalized mutual information is a biased measure for classification and community detection

Normalized mutual information is widely used as a similarity measure for evaluating the performance of clustering and classification algorithms. In this paper, we show that results returned by the normalized mutual information are biased for two reasons: first, because they ignore the information content of the contingency table and, second, because their symmetric normalization introduces spurious dependence on algorithm output. We introduce a modified version of the mutual information that remedies both of these shortcomings. As a practical demonstration of the importance of using an unbiased measure, we perform extensive numerical tests on a basket of popular algorithms for network community detection and show that one's conclusions about which algorithm is best are significantly affected by the biases in the traditional mutual information.

20 years of network community detection

A fundamental technical challenge in the analysis of network data is the automated discovery of communities - groups of nodes that are strongly connected or that share similar features or roles. In this commentary we review progress in the field over the last 20 years.

Fast computation of rankings from pairwise comparisons

We study the ranking of individuals, teams, or objects on the basis of pairwise comparisons using the Bradley-Terry model. Maximum-likelihood estimates of rankings within this model are commonly made using a simple iterative algorithm first introduced by Zermelo almost a century ago. Here we describe an alternative and similarly simple iteration that solves the same problem much faster -- over a hundred times faster in some cases. We demonstrate this algorithm with applications to a range of example data sets and derive some results regarding its convergence.

Rankings from multimodal pairwise comparisons

The task of ranking individuals or teams, based on a set of comparisons between pairs, arises in various contexts, including sporting competitions and the analysis of dominance hierarchies among animals and humans. Given data on which competitors beat which others, the challenge is to rank the competitors from best to worst. Here we study the problem of computing rankings when there are multiple, potentially conflicting modes of comparison, such as multiple types of dominance behaviors among animals. We assume that we do not know a priori what information each behavior conveys about the ranking, or even whether they convey any information at all. Nonetheless we show that it is possible to compute a ranking in this situation and present a fast method for doing so, based on a combination of an expectation-maximization algorithm and a modified Bradley-Terry model. We give a selection of example applications to both animal and human competition.

Message passing for probabilistic models on networks with loops

In this paper, we extend a recently proposed framework for message passing on "loopy" networks to the solution of probabilistic models. We derive a self-consistent set of message passing equations that allow for fast computation of probability distributions in systems that contain short loops, potentially with high density, as well as expressions for the entropy and partition function of such systems, which are notoriously difficult quantities to compute. Using the Ising model as an example, we show that our solutions are asymptotically exact on certain classes of networks with short loops and offer a good approximation on more general networks, improving significantly on results derived from standard belief propagation. We also discuss potential applications of our method to a variety of other problems.

Improved mutual information measure for classification and community detection

The information theoretic quantity known as mutual information finds wide use in classification and community detection analyses to compare two classifications of the same set of objects into groups. In the context of classification algorithms, for instance, it is often used to compare discovered classes to known ground truth and hence to quantify algorithm performance. Here we argue that the standard mutual information, as commonly defined, omits a crucial term which can become large under real-world conditions, producing results that can be substantially in error. We demonstrate how to correct this error and define a mutual information that works in all cases. We discuss practical implementation of the new measure and give some example applications.

Structure and inference in annotated networks

For many networks of scientific interest we know both the connections of the network and information about the network nodes, such as the age or gender of individuals in a social network, geographic location of nodes in the Internet, or cellular function of nodes in a gene regulatory network. Here we demonstrate how this "metadata" can be used to improve our analysis and understanding of network structure. We focus in particular on the problem of community detection in networks and develop a mathematically principled approach that combines a network and its metadata to detect communities more accurately than can be done with either alone. Crucially, the method does not assume that the metadata are correlated with the communities we are trying to find. Instead the method learns whether a correlation exists and correctly uses or ignores the metadata depending on whether they contain useful information. The learned correlations are also of interest in their own right, allowing us to make predictions about the community membership of nodes whose network connections are unknown. We demonstrate our method on synthetic networks with known structure and on real-world networks, large and small, drawn from social, biological, and technological domains.

Hierarchical structure and the prediction of missing links in networks

Networks have in recent years emerged as an invaluable tool for describing and quantifying complex systems in many branches of science. Recent studies suggest that networks often exhibit hierarchical organization, where vertices divide into groups that further subdivide into groups of groups, and so forth over multiple scales. In many cases these groups are found to correspond to known functional units, such as ecological niches in food webs, modules in biochemical networks (protein interaction networks, metabolic networks, or genetic regulatory networks), or communities in social networks. Here we present a general technique for inferring hierarchical structure from network data and demonstrate that the existence of hierarchy can simultaneously explain and quantitatively reproduce many commonly observed topological properties of networks, such as right-skewed degree distributions, high clustering coefficients, and short path lengths. We further show that knowledge of hierarchical structure can be used to predict missing connections in partially known networks with high accuracy, and for more general network structures than competing techniques. Taken together, our results suggest that hierarchy is a central organizing principle of complex networks, capable of offering insight into many network phenomena.