Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40603461›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

An egonet based approach to effective weighted network comparison.

Carlo Piccardi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Carlo PiccardiDepartment of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133, Milano, Italy. carlo.piccardi@polimi.it.

Funding

Ministero dell'Università e della Ricerca P2022AKRZ9
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the impressive growth of network models in practically every scientific and technological area, we are often faced with the need to compare graphs, i.e., to quantify their (dis)similarity using appropriate metrics. This is necessary, for example, to identify networks with comparable characteristics or to spot anomalous instants in a time sequence of graphs. While a large number of metrics are available for binary networks, the set of comparison methods capable of handling weighted graphs is much smaller. Yet, the strength of connections is often a key ingredient of the model, and ignoring this information could lead to misleading results. In this paper we introduce a family of dissimilarity measures to compare undirected weighted networks. They fall into the class of alignment-free metrics: as such, they do not require the correspondence of the nodes between the two graphs and can also compare networks of different sizes. In short, they are based on the distributions, on the graph, of a few egonet features which are easily defined and computed: the distance between two graphs is then the distance between the corresponding distributions. On a properly defined testbed with a pool of weighted network models with diversified characteristics, the proposed metrics are shown to achieve state-of-the-art performance in the model classification task. The effectiveness and applicability of the proposed metrics are then demonstrated on two examples. In the first, some "filtering" schemes - designed to eliminate non-significant links while maintaining most of the total weight - are evaluated in their ability to produce as output a graph faithful to the original, in terms of the local structure around nodes. In the second example, analyzing a timeline of stock market correlation graphs highlights anomalies associated with periods of financial instability.

Identifiers

PMID40603461
PMCPMC12222482

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.