ArticleProceedings. IEEE International Conference on Data Mining2016
Self-Grouping Multi-Network Clustering.
Article in Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Survey on graph embeddings and their applications to machine learning problems on graphs.PeerJ. Computer science · 2021Article
- Disease gene prioritization by integrating tissue-specific molecular networks using a robust multi-network model.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Joint clustering of multiple networks has been shown to be more accurate than performing clustering on individual networks separately. Many multi-view and multi-domain network clustering methods have been developed for joint multi-network clustering. These methods typically assume there is a common clustering structure shared by all networks, and different networks can provide complementary information on this underlying clustering structure. However, this assumption is too strict to hold in many emerging real-life applications, where multiple networks have diverse data distributions. More popularly, the networks in consideration belong to different underlying groups. Only networks in the same underlying group share similar clustering structures. Better clustering performance can be achieved by considering such groups differently. As a result, an ideal method should be able to automatically detect network groups so that networks in the same group share a common clustering structure. To address this problem, we propose a novel method, ComClus, to simultaneously group and cluster multiple networks. ComClus treats node clusters as features of networks and uses them to differentiate different network groups. Network grouping and clustering are coupled and mutually enhanced during the learning process. Extensive experimental evaluation on a variety of synthetic and real datasets demonstrates the effectiveness of our method.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.