PS, one final command is the following, i.e. without any weights argument 
passed to the modularity function, gives this (so it’s the default output). I 
am wondering therefore what is the ‘right’ answer, 0.031 or 0.055, and what the 
difference is

> modularity(net,membership(cluster_leading_eigen(net, weights = 
> E(net)$weight)))
[1] 0.03061224




> On 25 May 2017, at 10:43, Edmund Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Gabor,
> 
> Thanks for your reply. 
> 
> Here are 4 different commands and their result, I guess I am just a bit 
> confused how they relate to each other. 
> 
> The first two are using the cluster_leading_eigen alone, the second two use 
> that command to find the communities and then the modularity function to get 
> the modularity value out of it
> 
> Would I be right in understanding that cluster_leading_eigen only uses the 
> weights argument after the communities have been found - but then why does it 
> return the same value below for the first two commands - and why is it 
> different to the third command
> 
> Thanks
> 
> > cluster_leading_eigen(net, weights = E(net)$weight)
> IGRAPH clustering leading eigenvector, groups: 2, mod: 0.055
> + groups:
>   $`1`
>   [1] "YV" "B"  "P" 
>   
>   $`2`
>   [1] "DG" "V" 
> 
> 
> > cluster_leading_eigen(net, weights = NULL)
> IGRAPH clustering leading eigenvector, groups: 2, mod: 0.055
> + groups:
>   $`1`
>   [1] "YV" "B"  "P" 
>   
>   $`2`
>   [1] "DG" "V" 
> 
> > modularity(net,membership(cluster_leading_eigen(net, weights = 
> > E(net)$weight)),weights=NULL)
> [1] 0.03061224
> 
> > modularity(net,membership(cluster_leading_eigen(net, weights = 
> > E(net)$weight)),weights=E(net)$weight)
> [1] 0.0546875
> 
> 
> 
>> On 25 May 2017, at 06:51, Gábor Csárdi <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> IIRC the original algorithm can be extended easily to take weights
>> into account.
>> 
>> If you think the igraph is not doing that (and the docs say that it
>> would), can you please provide a small example that gives you the same
>> results with or without (large enough) weights? Thanks.
>> 
>> Gabor
>> 
>> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Edmund Hunt <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I have a question/comment about the leading.eigenvector.community function
>>> in igraph
>>> 
>>> It has an argument for weights, but this seems to make no difference to the
>>> calculated clusters/resulting modularity
>>> 
>>> Indeed I don’t think Newman’s algorithm takes edge weights into account?
>>> 
>>> Is it the case that the weights are only used after the community detection
>>> has taken place, to calculate a modularity value? Is it appropriate to use
>>> the weights to calculate modularity, can anyone advise me what is the
>>> ‘right’ thing to do with a weighted, undirected network - is it definitely
>>> to use the weights in the modularity calculation, or is there a free choice
>>> 
>>> Perhaps these issues could be made clearer in the function help
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> igraph-help mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> igraph-help mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help
> 

_______________________________________________
igraph-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help

Reply via email to