graph-tool August 2022

graph-tool@skewed.de

3 participants
2 discussions

Extra levels created by minimize_nested_blockmodel_dl
by Kevin Reuning 31 Aug '22

31 Aug '22

Hello, I am estimating a nested_block_model with bipartite data and am getting a strange result. There are about 4,000 nodes in the network and I am estimating a model by: ``` state_dc = minimize_nested_blockmodel_dl(G, state_args=dict(deg_corr=True, clabel=bipart.a, pclabel=bipart.a, recs=[G.ep.weight], rec_types=["discrete-poisson"])) for i in range(1000): # this should be sufficiently large state_dc.multiflip_mcmc_sweep(beta=np.inf, niter=10) ``` The results find 13 nested levels, but after level 5 there are only 2 nonempty blocks found in each additional level. I'm not sure if this is really a problem, or I can just ignore the levels where nothing really changes. Any advice/help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you -Kevin Kevin Reuning http://kevinreuning.com Assistant Professor, Political Science Miami University

2 1

Calling node predicates while calculating subgraph_isomorphism?
by Sergey Mironov 31 Aug '22

31 Aug '22

Hi. I'm interested in finding subgraph isomorphisms on graphs representing tensor networks. Nodes of such graphs contain expressions (but here one could think of arithmetic expressions over +-/* and variables). Let's say I want to find an isomorphism between my graph and a pattern graph, which contains more generic expressions. Comparing expressions directly doesn't make much sense because of variables, so some form of unification[1] should be used instead. What strategy could I use to fit the existing API of subgraph_isomorphism which currently only allows me to calculate some fixed labels for nodes? Is it hard(feasible) to modify the API by adding some form of predicate comparison of nodes? BR, Sergei [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unification_(computer_science)#Examples_of_sy…

2 1

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

graph-tool August 2022