Analysis of Network Clustering Algorithms and Cluster Quality Metrics at Scale

Abstract

Notions of community quality underlie network clustering. While studies surrounding network clustering are increasingly common, a precise understanding of the realtionship between different cluster quality metrics is unknown. In this paper, we examine the relationship between stand-alone cluster quality metrics and information recovery metrics through a rigorous analysis of four widely-used network clustering algorithms -- Louvain, Infomap, label propagation, and smart local moving. We consider the stand-alone quality metrics of modularity, conductance, and coverage, and we consider the information recovery metrics of adjusted Rand score, normalized mutual information, and a variant of normalized mutual information used in previous work. Our study includes both synthetic graphs and empirical data sets of sizes varying from 1,000 to 1,000,000 nodes. We find significant differences among the results of the different cluster quality metrics. For example, clustering algorithms can return a value of 0.4 out of 1 on modularity but score 0 out of 1 on information recovery. We find conductance, though imperfect, to be the stand-alone quality metric that best indicates performance on information recovery metrics. Our study shows that the variant of normalized mutual information used in previous work cannot be assumed to differ only slightly from traditional normalized mutual information. Smart local moving is the best performing algorithm in our study, but discrepancies between cluster evaluation metrics prevent us from declaring it absolutely superior. Louvain performed better than Infomap in nearly all the tests in our study, contradicting the results of previous work in which Infomap was superior to Louvain. We find that although label propagation performs poorly when clusters are less clearly defined, it scales efficiently and accurately to large graphs with well-defined clusters.

References in corpus (10)

• Fast unfolding of communities in large networks
• Modularity and community structure in networks
• Natural Scales in Geographical Patterns
• Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure
• Near linear time algorithm to detect community structures in large-scale networks
• Benchmark graphs for testing community detection algorithms
• Resolution limit in community detection
• Detecting the overlapping and hierarchical community structure of complex networks
• Note on the equivalence of the label propagation method of community detection and a Potts model approach
• Efficient community detection of network flows for varying Markov times and bipartite networks

Cited by in corpus (16)

• On Proximity and Structural Role-based Embeddings in Networks: Misconceptions, Techniques, and Applications
• Towards Guidelines for Assessing Qualities of Machine Learning Systems
• Artificial Benchmark for Community Detection (ABCD): Fast Random Graph Model with Community Structure
• Concept Drift Adaptation in Text Stream Mining Settings: A Systematic Review
• Viewing Computer Science through Citation Analysis; Salton and Bergmark Redux
• Robustness of community structure under edge addition
• Finding Scientific Communities In Citation Graphs: Convergent Clustering
• Impact of network topology on efficiency of proximity measures for community detection
• Identifying bias in cluster quality metrics
• A Statistical Density-Based Analysis of Graph Clustering Algorithm Performance
• Free Energy Node Embedding via Generalized Skip-gram with Negative Sampling
• Hyperspectral image segmentation with a machine learning model trained using quantum annealer
• Mixed Data Clustering Survey and Challenges
• Towards Semantic Noise Cleansing of Categorical Data based on Semantic Infusion
• Research Portfolio Analysis and Topic Prominence
• Selection of single cell clustering methodologies through rank aggregation of multiple performance measures