Sorry about the nonsense sentence in my previous email. I meant to say that Case#2 represents a scenario that will not make my inquiry possible as indicated.
-Ahmed On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Ahmed Abdeen Hamed <[email protected] > wrote: > Thank you for this response! > > My purpose of finding the original link to the event was to hierarchically > cluster maximal cliques. I see the case two different case scenarios that > will not make this possible. If I am interested in all events attended by > all members such that > > In Case #2: (A,B) --> E1 and (A,C) --> E2 > > What is the computational cost for this step? > > -Ahmed > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Tamas Nepusz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> This is not possible in general as it is easy to construct two networks >> which >> result in the same affiliation network representation -- even if you use >> weights to indicate the number of events attended jointly. For example, >> with >> three people (A, B and C): >> >> Case #1: A, B and C attended event E1. >> Case #2: A and B attended event E1, A and C attended event E2, B and C >> attended >> event E3. >> >> In both cases, the affiliation network will be a triangle. >> >> T. >> >> On 06/04, Ahmed Abdeen Hamed wrote: >> > Hello friends, >> > >> > Say your original network was constructed from people and events. Now, >> an >> > affiliation network is derived based on the notion of people who are >> going >> > to the same event. If you have computed cliques from this affiliation >> > network, can you link this clique back to the original event being >> > attended? Any examples would be appreciated. >> > >> > Sincerely, >> > >> > -Ahmed >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > igraph-help mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help >> >> >> -- >> T. >> > >
_______________________________________________ igraph-help mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help
