Statistical inference of assortative community structures

These approaches, however, concept (for which there are many). Historically, most are based on general mixing patterns, which include community detection methods proposed have focused on assortativity only as a special case. In many ways this the detection of assortative communities, i.e. groups of is useful, and in fact arguably superior, since if assortativity nodes that tend to be more connected to themselves than happens to be the dominating pattern, then the to other nodes in the network. However, there are also general approach will capture it, otherwise it will reveal a community detection methods that are more general, and different structure. However, having only a more general attempt to cluster together nodes that have similar patterns method at our disposal also has its shortcomings. First, of connection, regardless if they are assortative or if it is true that assortativity is the main pattern for a not [3-5]. The widespread use of assortative community class of networks, then the more general representation detection methods has lead to the belief that the presence is needlessly wasteful for them, since it not only gives us of communities is a pervasive feature of many different more than we need, but in doing so it prevents us from kinds of real networks [6]. Although the concept of assortativity focusing on the more central features, at the cost of algorithmic is a central one in the study of social networks precision. Second, with a more general method (known as "homophily" in that context) [7], and is also an it can be difficult to quantify precisely how much has appealing construct in biology [8-10], it is to some extent been wasted in the representation, and what is indeed unclear if the perceived assortativity of many networks the simpler pattern hiding inside it.