modularity

问题 I have calculated directed modularity by means of DirectedLouvain (https://github.com/nicolasdugue/DirectedLouvain). I am now trying to test the significance of the values obtained, by means of a null model. To do it I need to run 1000 times one of the commands of DirectedLouvain over 1000 different input files. Following @ KamilCuk recomendations I have used this code that takes the 1000 *.txt input files and generates 1000 *.bin files and 1000 *.weights files. It worked perfectly: find

问题 I have calculated directed modularity by means of DirectedLouvain (https://github.com/nicolasdugue/DirectedLouvain). I am now trying to test the significance of the values obtained, by means of a null model. To do it I need to run 1000 times one of the commands of DirectedLouvain over 1000 different input files. Following @ KamilCuk recomendations I have used this code that takes the 1000 *.txt input files and generates 1000 *.bin files and 1000 *.weights files. It worked perfectly: find

问题 I'm building web app that has modular design. I have ER database schema for whole app. Tables there are grouped by the module they will be used by. There will be core modules and I plan to add new ones that depend on that core i.e. that need data from core modules tables. When NEW module needs to access core tables, what practices should I follow: 1.In purpose of reading, a. is it okay to read from core tables or I need to build interfaces in core module? b. is JOIN operation with core tables

问题 I'm building web app that has modular design. I have ER database schema for whole app. Tables there are grouped by the module they will be used by. There will be core modules and I plan to add new ones that depend on that core i.e. that need data from core modules tables. When NEW module needs to access core tables, what practices should I follow: 1.In purpose of reading, a. is it okay to read from core tables or I need to build interfaces in core module? b. is JOIN operation with core tables

问题 In the igraph ?modularity section there is example code given as g <- graph.full(5) %du% graph.full(5) %du% graph.full(5) g <- add.edges(g, c(1,6, 1,11, 6, 11)) wtc <- walktrap.community(g) modularity(wtc) #[1] 0.5757575 modularity(g, membership(wtc)) #[1] 0.5757576 the output of wtc shows: wtc #Graph community structure calculated with the walktrap algorithm #Number of communities (best split): 3 #Modularity (best split): 0.5757575 #Membership vector: # [1] 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 I am

问题 I used the fastgreedy algorithm in igraph for my community detection in a weighted, undirected graph. Afterwards I wanted to have a look at the modularity and I got different values for different methods and I am wondering why. I included a short example, which demonstrates my problem: library(igraph) d<-matrix(c(1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.9, 0.9, 0.2, 1, 0.6, 0.4, 0.5, 0.3, 0.6, 1, 0.1, 0.8, 0.9, 0.4, 0.1, 1, 0.5, 0.9, 0.5, 0.8, 0.5, 1), byrow=T, nrow=5) g<-graph.adjacency(d, weighted=T, mode="lower"

问题 I used the fastgreedy algorithm in igraph for my community detection in a weighted, undirected graph. Afterwards I wanted to have a look at the modularity and I got different values for different methods and I am wondering why. I included a short example, which demonstrates my problem: library(igraph) d<-matrix(c(1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.9, 0.9, 0.2, 1, 0.6, 0.4, 0.5, 0.3, 0.6, 1, 0.1, 0.8, 0.9, 0.4, 0.1, 1, 0.5, 0.9, 0.5, 0.8, 0.5, 1), byrow=T, nrow=5) g<-graph.adjacency(d, weighted=T, mode="lower"

问题 I am tasked with modularizing a C# app that is a rewrite of a very large Delphi app (the DB has 249 tables!). Business constraints proscribe a complete redesign for .NET and better overall architecture, so we are basically just incrementally rewriting module for module of the Delphi app in C#. Until finished, the suite will comprise a mixture of pending rewrites, and C# app modules I want to integrate using MEF. The app concerns itself with Time-and-Attendance and Access-Control, and has

问题 I am currently porting a framework for building applications on J2ME to Android. This framework consists of several projects that compile to libraries (jars). Each individual JAR can contain graphical data (resources, J4ME screens, etc.). Every project generally has a well defined entry point (module). When someone wants to build an application using the framework he must only create a Midlet project and add library dependencies and use the imported classes. We have been using the same

问题 I am currently porting a framework for building applications on J2ME to Android. This framework consists of several projects that compile to libraries (jars). Each individual JAR can contain graphical data (resources, J4ME screens, etc.). Every project generally has a well defined entry point (module). When someone wants to build an application using the framework he must only create a Midlet project and add library dependencies and use the imported classes. We have been using the same