arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2410.05487cs.SI
收藏

面向社交网络中社区检测方法的群体公平性度量指标

Group Fairness Metrics for Community Detection Methods in Social Networks

Elze de Vink, Akrati Saxena

AI总结:

针对社交网络社区检测方法易产生有偏结果、影响少数群体的问题,提出群体公平性度量指标Φ^F*_p,对比发现不同方法的性能-公平性权衡差异显著,无方法持续占优,为公平高效的社区检测方法开发提供支撑。

摘要:

理解社区结构在解释网络演化中发挥着核心作用,因为节点加入社区后,社区会进一步连接形成大规模复杂网络。在现实世界的网络中,节点往往基于种族、性别、族群或财富被划分到不同社区,由此引发结构性偏差与不平等。社区检测(CD)方法利用网络结构和节点属性识别社区,若未考虑结构性不平等就可能产生有偏的结果,对少数群体的影响尤为突出。本研究提出群体公平性度量指标($Φ^{F*}_{p}$),从公平性视角评估CD方法。我们还对现有CD方法开展了对比分析,重点关注性能与公平性之间的权衡,以判断某些方法是否会因社区的规模、密度或电导率而偏向特定类型的社区。研究结果表明,不同方法的权衡差异显著,没有哪一类方法能始终优于其他方法。所提出的度量指标与研究结论将助力开发并评估兼具公平性与高性能的CD方法。

英文摘要:

Understanding community structure has played an essential role in explaining network evolution, as nodes join communities which connect further to form large-scale complex networks. In real-world networks, nodes are often organized into communities based on ethnicity, gender, race, or wealth, leading to structural biases and inequalities. Community detection (CD) methods use network structure and nodes' attributes to identify communities, and can produce biased outcomes if they fail to account for structural inequalities, especially affecting minority groups. In this work, we propose group fairness metrics ($Φ^{F*}_{p}$) to evaluate CD methods from a fairness perspective. We also conduct a comparative analysis of existing CD methods, focusing on the performance-fairness trade-off, to determine whether certain methods favor specific types of communities based on their size, density, or conductance. Our findings reveal that the trade-off varies significantly across methods, with no specific type of method consistently outperforming others. The proposed metrics and insights will help develop and evaluate fair and high performing CD methods.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑