REVIEW 1 cited by
Comparison of Cross-Validation Methods for Stochastic Block Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
We introduce a novel cross-validation method that we call latinCV and we compare this method to other model selection methods using data generated from a stochastic block model. Comparing latinCV to other cross-validation methods, we show that latinCV performs similarly to a method described in \cite{hoff2008modeling} and that latinCV has a significantly larger true model recovery accuracy than the NCV method of \cite{chen2014network}. We also show that the reason for this discrepancy is related to the larger variance of the NCV estimate. Comparing latinCV to alternative model selection methods, we show that latinCV performs better than information criteria AIC and BIC, as well as the community detection method infomap and a routine that attempts to maximize modularity. The simulation study in this paper includes a range of network sizes and generative parameters for the stochastic block model that allow us to examine the relationship between model selection accuracy and the size and complexity of the model. Overall, latinCV performs more accurate model selection, and avoids overfitting better than any of the other model selection methods considered.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Selection of Exponential-Family Random Graph Models via Held-Out Predictive Evaluation (HOPE)
HOPE, a missing-data analogue of cross-validation for networks, is introduced as a model selection tool for ERGMs and applied to two social networks.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.