> For EB and FG the question is how you break the ties. In theory this > *could* be non-deterministic, i.e. random breaking of ties. For igraph > it is deterministic (if I remember well), but it might be platform > dependent.
Thank you for explanation. I made this earlier classification (WT, EB, FG: "deterministic"; spinglass, infomap, label propagation: "non-deterministic") from the results I've got using the data I have. , The results were obtained on Debian 6.0 x86_64 -- maybe it is interesting, if the results are platform-dependent. > What is a 'truly non-deterministic algorithm'? Depending on your > definition, yes, infomap might not be 'truly non-deterministic'. I just thought that "truly non-deterministic algorithm" is the one that yields a different result with each run; for instance, if N partitions are obtained by running an algorithm N times, and then all the partitions are compared pairwise, each-to-each, the similarity index (e.g., Jaccard similarity) would have a nearly Gaussian distribution (or other random). But now I see that it is not necessarily the case; e.g., if n ties are broken randomly at each run, this would produce 2^n different values for N>2^n runs. _______________________________________________ igraph-help mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help
