ArticleCommunications physics2024
Quantifying metadata relevance to network block structure using description length.
Article in Communications physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Network analysis is often enriched by including an examination of node metadata. In the context of understanding the mesoscale of networks it is often assumed that node groups based on metadata and node groups based on connectivity patterns are intrinsically linked. This assumption is increasingly being challenged, whereby metadata might be entirely unrelated to structure or, similarly, multiple sets of metadata might be relevant to the structure of a network in different ways. We propose the metablox tool to quantify the relationship between a network's node metadata and its mesoscale structure, measuring the strength of the relationship and the type of structural arrangement exhibited by the metadata. We show on a number of synthetic and empirical networks that our tool distinguishes relevant metadata and allows for this in a comparative setting, demonstrating that it can be used as part of systematic meta analyses for the comparison of networks from different domains.
Indexed as
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.