Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 57 references

Spectral clustering for dependent community Hawkes process models of temporal networks

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Under the dependent community Hawkes model class, spectral clustering on the event-count matrix recovers the true communities with a non-asymptotic misclustering bound that decays as the observation window grows.

desk verdict Main misclustering theorem is not established as written because the proof never transfers the Gaussian approximation to the spectral-norm event, but the model class and GMM identification are solid and the paper deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21845 v1 pith:BIWL4MT6 submitted 2025-05-28 stat.ML cs.LGcs.SIstat.ME

Lingfei Zhao , Hadeel Soliman , Kevin S. Xu , Subhadeep Paul This is my paper
classification stat.MLcs.LGcs.SIstat.ME MSC 62H3060G5562M09
keywords temporalnetworksrelationaleventsHawkesprocessescommunitydetectionspectralclusteringstochasticblockmodelgeneralizedmethodofmomentsnon-asymptoticbounds
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Temporal networks built from timestamped relational events often show community structure and mutual excitement, where one interaction triggers later interactions between other node pairs. This paper introduces the dependent community Hawkes (DCH) model class, which puts a stochastic block model on the baseline rates and a block-structured, mutually exciting Hawkes intensity on the event streams, and asks whether spectral clustering on the directed event-count matrix still recovers the hidden communities. The main claim is that it does: the misclustering rate is bounded non-asymptotically by an explicit function of node count, community count, observation time, and the total mutual-excitation level, and this rate goes to zero as time grows. A second contribution is the self-and-reciprocal (SR) submodel with a scalable generalized method of moments estimator, whose identification condition the paper proves and whose consistency is shown as both time and block sizes grow.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the block-diagonal excitation matrix Γ of the $n^{2}$-dimensional mutually exciting Hawkes process, reordered by block pairs, together with the row-and-column-sum identity ('stochastic equivalence') that makes every node pair in a community pair exert and absorb the same total excitation. This structure makes the expected count matrix equal to Z B Z^T, so its top singular vectors are exactly the community indicator matrix up to a transformation, giving a canonically identifiable signal. The argument then controls the noise by bounding the row sums of R = (I − Γ)^{−1} in terms of (1 − σ*)^{-2}(1 + γmax), importing a Gaussian approximation for the vectorized count matrix, and uses a Davis-Kahan/Wedin perturbation bound together with an approximate k-means step to turn the spectral-norm error into a per-node misclustering rate.

What would settle it

Simulate a DCH network with moderate n (say 100) and K = 4, run Algorithm 1 over a range of T, and compare the empirical misclustering rate against the predicted log T / T scaling: a slope far from −1 in log r versus log T, or a misclustering rate plateauing while the bound decays, would refute the Theorem 5 mechanism. A more direct test computes the Kolmogorov distance between the standardized vectorized count matrix and its approximating Gaussian for n = 50, 100, 200 and checks whether the $T^{{-1/6}}$ rate holds with a constant that does not grow with n.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central result is Theorem 5: if the n-node network is generated by a DCH model with spectral radius σ* < 1 and per-block excitation row sums bounded by γmax, then the misclustering rate r of the spectral clustering algorithm applied to the count matrix N_T satisfies r ≤ (log T / T) · 1440(2+ε)^2 n_max K / $λ_K^{2}$ · (1−σ*)^{−6}(1+γmax)^3 μmax (1+2 log n), with probability at least 1 − exp(−log n log T) − κ(n)/$T^{{1/6}}$. In the simplified symmetric submodel this yields r ≲ $K^{2}$ μmax log n log T / (n T), so consistency follows as T → ∞ and the required observation time grows with $K^{2}$ log n / n. The proof transfers a Gaussian approximation of the vectorized Hawkes count matrix to a spectral-norm bound on N_T minus its expectation, then converts the bound into a misclustering bound through a Davis-Kahan-type row-perturbation argument; the expected count matrix is shown to have singular vectors aligned with the community indicator matrix.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the imported Gaussian approximation of the whole vector of event counts, stated only for fixed n with an unspecified constant C(n), together with a small-variance condition that the paper says it verifies but never proves; if C(n) grows quickly with n, or the condition fails at the T values of interest, the claimed non-asymptotic n-dependence of the misclustering bound is not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the bound is right, spectral clustering is consistent for every DCH model as the observation window T grows, even though dyadic event streams are dependent.
  • For the simplified symmetric model, the bound shows the misclustering rate depends on K^2 μmax log n log T / (nT), making explicit how many nodes and how much observation time are needed.
  • The bound increases with γmax, the total mutual excitation per block pair, and blows up as the stability boundary σ* → 1, so stronger cross-dyad dependence is predicted to make communities harder to recover.
  • The restricted SR model's GMM estimator is consistent as T and block-pair sizes grow, and the paper proves the identification condition that prior GMM theory merely assumes.
  • On five real datasets the restricted SR model attains test log-likelihood and dynamic link prediction AUC competitive with the slower MULCH model while scaling to tens of thousands of nodes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial extension: the theorems transfer directly to static weighted directed networks whose edge counts are generated by a DCH process, suggesting spectral clustering accuracy in weighted networks is governed by n, T, and excitation strength, not just by edge density.
  • Editorial extension: the proof's reliance on an unspecified n-dependent constant in the Gaussian approximation means the true finite-sample scaling in n may be worse than the displayed (1+2 log n) factor, and an empirical check of the Gaussian approximation across n would test this directly.
  • Editorial extension: the identification-by-symmetry strategy behind the restricted SR model suggests a general recipe: impose a symmetric parameter constraint to reduce the parameter count to the number of first- and second-order cumulant equations, then verify identification case by case.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the dependent community Hawkes (DCH) family, which combines a stochastic block model on node pairs with mutually exciting multivariate Hawkes processes among pairs in the same or reciprocal block pairs. The main theoretical contribution is Theorem 5, a non-asymptotic upper bound on the misclustering rate of spectral clustering applied to the event count matrix, with explicit dependence on the number of nodes n, communities K, observation time T, and a dependence parameter γmax. The paper also proposes the self and reciprocal excitation (SR) model, a restricted version with a generalized method of moments (GMM) estimator whose identification and consistency are proven, and supplements the theory with simulations and real-data experiments on five temporal network datasets.

Significance. If the main result is correct, it would provide the first non-asymptotic misclustering guarantee for spectral clustering under a class of dependent Hawkes-process block models, extending prior consistency results for the conditionally independent CHIP model. The proposed SR model and its GMM estimator are computationally scalable and are shown to be competitive with much slower alternatives on real data. The proof of the GMM identification condition for the restricted SR model is a useful standalone contribution. The empirical evaluation is thorough and generally aligned with the qualitative predictions of the theory.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix A.1, proof of Theorem 3] The proof does not justify the crucial transfer from a coordinatewise Kolmogorov bound to a spectral-norm tail. After applying Proposition 2, the proof asserts that for any x the coordinatewise orthant probabilities of sqrt(T)(vec(N_T)/T - R vec(mu)) and vec(M) differ by at most kappa/T^{1/6}, and then it applies this to the event {||M|| > a}. But {||M|| > a} is the supremum of linear events over the unit sphere, not an orthant event, and neither the d_K bound nor the d_2 bound directly controls such an event. An epsilon-net argument or another mechanism is required, and the stated constants do not account for the dimension-dependent factors that such an argument would introduce. This gap is load-bearing because Theorem 5 inherits the spectral-norm control from Theorem 3.
  2. [Appendix A.1, Gaussian tail computation] The algebra of the Gaussian tail bound does not deliver the displayed inequality in Theorem 3. With C1 = (1 - sigma*)^-2 (1 + gamma_max), the proof chooses a = sqrt(2 n C1^3 mu_max n log n log T) and uses E||M|| <= 2 sqrt(n C1^3 mu_max (1 + 2 log n)). This yields ||M|| <= 2 sqrt(n C1^3 mu_max (1 + 2 log n)) + n sqrt(2 C1^3 mu_max log n log T) with probability at least 1 - exp(-n log n log T), not the stated 3 sqrt(n C1^3 mu_max (1 + 2 log n) log T). For large n the former is larger by a factor on the order of sqrt(n / log T), so the final inequality as written does not follow. Either the threshold or the probability exponent must be corrected.
  3. [Proposition 2] The statement of Proposition 2 says 'We verify that sigma > 0 and d2(Y_T, G) <= (sqrt(4 log n + 2))/(2 sigma) for sufficiently large T', but no such verification appears in the proof or elsewhere. While sigma > 0 is plausible under mu > 0 and rho(Gamma) < 1, the d2 inequality depends on the unspecified constant C(n) from Proposition 1, and the phrase 'sufficiently large T' is incompatible with Theorem 3's claim for all T > 1. The paper should either provide the verification, state a threshold T_0(n), or weaken the theorem accordingly.
  4. [Theorem 3 and Theorem 5, probability statement] The theorems state the probability as 1 - exp(-log n log T) - kappa(n)/T^{1/6} for every T > 1, but kappa(n) is an unspecified positive function of n. For small T the second term can exceed 1, making the claimed probability negative and the statement vacuous. The non-asymptotic claim therefore needs a qualification such as T >= T_0(n), or the small-T regime must be handled separately. Relatedly, Proposition 1 is imported only for fixed n with an unspecified C(n); without explicit control of C(n), the claimed n-dependence in the misclustering bound is not fully established.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix A.2, proof of Theorem 5] The probability is written as 1 - exp(log n log T) - kappa(n)/T^{1/6}; the minus sign before exp is missing and should read 1 - exp(-log n log T) - kappa(n)/T^{1/6}.
  2. [Appendix A.3, proof of Corollary 6] The text says 'The Kth largest singular values of E[N_T]/T is n/K (v1 - v2)', but it should refer to the K-th singular value lambda_K, and the derivation of lambda_K from the block structure of the expected count matrix should be made explicit because it drives the K^2/(nT) rate.
  3. [Section 5.2, GMM simulation] The caption of Figure 4 says the MSEs 'decrease as n or T decreases'; this should read 'decrease as n or T increases' (or equivalently, 'increase as n or T decreases').
  4. [Section 4, GMM setup] In the proof of Theorem 9, the definition of g02(., .) is written as (Lambda_ba)_0 - Lambda_ab; this appears to be a typo for (Lambda_ba)_0 - Lambda_ba, since otherwise the moment function is not centered at zero at the true parameter.
  5. [Section 3.1, Theorem 3 statement] The notation 'for any n > 1 and T > 1' is repeated in several statements, but the proof only establishes the Gaussian approximation for fixed n with a constant C(n); the paper should state explicitly which results are uniform in n and which are not.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the main bound is assembled from external Gaussian approximation and standard matrix perturbation results; the authors' prior MULCH theorem supplies an independent block-constant expectation fact rather than the target result.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain. Theorem 5 rests on Theorem 3's spectral-norm deviation bound, Lemma 4's singular-vector separation, and Proposition 14's Davis-Kahan variant. Theorem 3's probabilistic engine is Proposition 1 (Khabou 2021), converted to a Kolmogorov bound by Proposition 2 (Gaunt and Li 2023); these are external results and are not fitted or derived from the paper's own conclusions. Lemma 4 uses \tilde N = ZBZ^T, which the paper attributes to Theorem 4.1 of Soliman et al. (2022). This is a self-citation, but it provides a parameter-free structural fact about the expected count matrix under the assumed block-constant \mu and block-diagonal \Gamma; it is neither the misclustering target nor a fitted quantity, so it does not make the derivation circular. Proposition 11 from the same prior paper is restated with a proof in Appendix B.1. The GMM identification claim (Lemma 8) is proved from first principles in Appendix A.4, and the stability condition (Lemma 7) is derived from the 2x2 eigenvalue equation. The remaining ingredients—Minc's row-sum/spectral-radius bounds, Oliveira's matrix Khintchine inequality, and Rohe et al.'s clustering perturbation lemma—are standard external results. The reader-visible concern that the proof of Theorem 3 asserts the transfer from a coordinatewise Kolmogorov bound to a spectral-norm tail without a derived mechanism is a correctness/rigor gap, not a circularity: it does not identify the claimed bound with an input, a fitted value, or the conclusion of a self-citation chain. Therefore no circular step is exhibited, and the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central bounds rest on two uncharacterized constants and on external Gaussian approximation results. No new physical or conceptual entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • C(n) = not specified
    Constant in the Gaussian approximation for the Hawkes count vector (Proposition 1, from Khabou 2021). The paper gives no bound on how it grows with n, so the non-asymptotic claim for all n is not fully quantitative.
  • kappa(n) = not specified
    Constant in the probability bound in Theorems 3 and 5. Its behavior with n is uncharacterized, and the bound is stated for all T>1 even though kappa(n)/T^(1/6) can exceed 1 for small T.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The multivariate Hawkes process count vector has a Gaussian approximation with convergence rate C(n)/sqrt(T) in d2 distance.
    Imported from Khabou (2021), an arXiv preprint not proved in this paper; the constant C(n) is not made explicit.
  • ad hoc to paper The condition in Proposition 2 that d2(YT,G) <= (sqrt(4 log n + 2))/(2 sigma) for sufficiently large T, with sigma>0, is satisfied.
    The paper states 'We verify that...' but provides no verification; the subsequent Kolmogorov bound and Theorem 3 depend on this.
  • domain assumption The expected count matrix E[N_T] has rank at most K and can be written as Z B Z^T.
    Taken from Theorem 4.1 of the authors' own MULCH paper (Soliman et al. 2022); it is a standard consequence of the block structure but is not re-proved here.
  • domain assumption Stability of the Hawkes process: spectral radius rho(Gamma) < 1.
    Assumption (1) in Theorem 3, necessary for the multivariate Hawkes process to be stationary and for (I-Gamma) to be invertible.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spectral clustering for dependent community Hawkes process models of temporal networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BIWL4MT6

@misc{pith2026250521845,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spectral clustering for dependent community Hawkes process models of temporal networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BIWL4MT6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21845}
}
read the original abstract

Temporal networks observed continuously over time through timestamped relational events data are commonly encountered in application settings including online social media communications, financial transactions, and international relations. Temporal networks often exhibit community structure and strong dependence patterns among node pairs. This dependence can be modeled through mutual excitations, where an interaction event from a sender to a receiver node increases the possibility of future events among other node pairs. We provide statistical results for a class of models that we call dependent community Hawkes (DCH) models, which combine the stochastic block model with mutually exciting Hawkes processes for modeling both community structure and dependence among node pairs, respectively. We derive a non-asymptotic upper bound on the misclustering error of spectral clustering on the event count matrix as a function of the number of nodes and communities, time duration, and the amount of dependence in the model. Our result leverages recent results on bounding an appropriate distance between a multivariate Hawkes process count vector and a Gaussian vector, along with results from random matrix theory. We also propose a DCH model that incorporates only self and reciprocal excitation along with highly scalable parameter estimation using a Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) estimator that we demonstrate to be consistent for growing network size and time duration.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21845 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An example of dependence in temporal networks: an event from A1 to B1 (solid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Heat map of adjusted Rand index of spectral clustering with varying [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The spectral norm of error and the spectral clustering accuracy with different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Averaged mean squared errors (MSEs) of GMM estimator for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a)-(b) Adjusted Rand index of spectral clustering and the refinement algorithm with varying T and n, respectively (± standard error over 10 simulated networks). (c)-(d) Computation time of the spectral clustering + estimation time with and without refinement while var…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Average adjusted Rand index while modifying one or more parameters at each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Uncovering causality from multivariate hawkes integrated cumulants

    Massil Achab, Emmanuel Bacry, St \'e phane Ga \" ffas, Iacopo Mastromatteo, and Jean-Fran c ois Muzy. Uncovering causality from multivariate hawkes integrated cumulants. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 18 0 (192): 0 1--28, 2018

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Chip: A hawkes process model for continuous-time networks with scalable and consistent estimation

    Makan Arastuie, Subhadeep Paul, and Kevin Xu. Chip: A hawkes process model for continuous-time networks with scalable and consistent estimation. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 33, 2020

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Hawkes processes in finance

    Emmanuel Bacry, Iacopo Mastromatteo, and Jean-Fran c ois Muzy. Hawkes processes in finance. Market Microstructure and Liquidity, 1 0 (01): 0 1550005, 2015

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    Charles Blundell, Jeff Beck, and Katherine A. Heller. Modelling reciprocating relationships with Hawkes processes. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 25, pages 2600--2608, 2012

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    Concentration inequalities: A nonasymptotic theory of independence

    St \'e phane Boucheron, G \'a bor Lugosi, and Pascal Massart. Concentration inequalities: A nonasymptotic theory of independence. Oxford university press, 2013

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    Networks evolving step by step: Statistical analysis of dyadic event data

    Ulrik Brandes, J \"u rgen Lerner, and Tom AB Snijders. Networks evolving step by step: Statistical analysis of dyadic event data. In 2009 international conference on advances in Social network analysis and mining, pages 200--205. IEEE, 2009

    work page 2009

  7. [7]

    A relational event framework for social action

    Carter T Butts. A relational event framework for social action. Sociological Methodology, 38 0 (1): 0 155--200, 2008

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    Global and individualized community detection in inhomogeneous multilayer networks

    Shuxiao Chen, Sifan Liu, and Zongming Ma. Global and individualized community detection in inhomogeneous multilayer networks. The Annals of Statistics, 50 0 (5): 0 2664--2693, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    Multiple change points detection and clustering in dynamic networks

    Marco Corneli, Pierre Latouche, and Fabrice Rossi. Multiple change points detection and clustering in dynamic networks. Statistics and Computing, 28 0 (5): 0 989--1007, 2018

    2018

  2. [10]

    The rotation of eigenvectors by a perturbation

    Chandler Davis and William Morton Kahan. The rotation of eigenvectors by a perturbation. III . SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 7 0 (1): 0 1--46, 1970

    1970

  3. [11]

    Analyzing escalations in militarized interstate disputes using motifs in temporal networks

    Hung N Do and Kevin S Xu. Analyzing escalations in militarized interstate disputes using motifs in temporal networks. In Complex Networks & Their Applications X: Volume 1, Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Complex Networks and Their Applications COMPLEX NETW...

    2021

  4. [12]

    Modeling relational events via latent classes

    Christopher DuBois and Padhraic Smyth. Modeling relational events via latent classes . In Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 803--812, 2010

    2010

  5. [13]

    Butts, and Padhraic Smyth

    Christopher DuBois, Carter T. Butts, and Padhraic Smyth. Stochastic blockmodeling of relational event dynamics . In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 238--246, 2013

    2013

  6. [14]

    Inferring friendship network structure by using mobile phone data

    Nathan Eagle, Alex Sandy Pentland, and David Lazer. Inferring friendship network structure by using mobile phone data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106 0 (36): 0 15274--15278, 2009

    2009

  7. [15]

    Hawkes processes with stochastic exogenous effects for continuous-time interaction modelling

    Xuhui Fan, Yaqiong Li, Ling Chen, Bin Li, and Scott A Sisson. Hawkes processes with stochastic exogenous effects for continuous-time interaction modelling. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45 0 (2): 0 1848--1861, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Zhang, and Harrison H

    Chao Gao, Zongming Ma, Anderson Y. Zhang, and Harrison H. Zhou. Achieving optimal misclassification proportion in stochastic block models. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 18 0 (1): 0 1980--2024, 2017

    1980

  9. [17]

    Functional central limit theorems for stationary hawkes processes and application to infinite-server queues

    Xuefeng Gao and Lingjiong Zhu. Functional central limit theorems for stationary hawkes processes and application to infinite-server queues. Queueing Systems, 90 0 (1): 0 161--206, 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Bounding kolmogorov distances through wasserstein and related integral probability metrics

    Robert E Gaunt and Siqi Li. Bounding kolmogorov distances through wasserstein and related integral probability metrics. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 522 0 (1): 0 126985, 2023

    2023

  11. [19]

    Multi-Dimensional Gaussian Fluctuations on the Poisson Space

    Peccati Giovanni and Cengbo Zheng. Multi-Dimensional Gaussian Fluctuations on the Poisson Space . Electronic Journal of Probability, 15: 0 1487 -- 1527, 2010

    2010

  12. [20]

    Social networks and the identification of peer effects

    Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham and Guido W Imbens. Social networks and the identification of peer effects. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 31 0 (3): 0 253--264, 2013

    2013

  13. [21]

    Generalized method of moments

    Alastair R Hall. Generalized method of moments. OUP Oxford, 2004

    2004

  14. [22]

    Spectra of some self-exciting and mutually exciting point processes

    Alan G Hawkes. Spectra of some self-exciting and mutually exciting point processes. Biometrika, 58 0 (1): 0 83--90, 1971

    1971

  15. [23]

    Hawkes processes and their applications to finance: a review

    Alan G Hawkes. Hawkes processes and their applications to finance: a review. Quantitative Finance, 18 0 (2): 0 193--198, 2018

    2018

  16. [24]

    Holland, K

    P. Holland, K. Laskey, and S. Leinhardt. Stochastic blockmodels: some first steps. Social Networks, 5: 0 109--137, 1983

    1983

  17. [25]

    Temporal networks

    Petter Holme and Jari Saram \"a ki. Temporal networks. Physics reports, 519 0 (3): 0 97--125, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    A mutually exciting latent space hawkes process model for continuous-time networks

    Zhipeng Huang, Hadeel Soliman, Subhadeep Paul, and Kevin S Xu. A mutually exciting latent space hawkes process model for continuous-time networks. Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    Comparing partitions

    Lawrence Hubert and Phipps Arabie. Comparing partitions. Journal of classification, 2 0 (1): 0 193--218, 1985

    1985

  20. [28]

    The block point process model for continuous-time event-based dynamic networks

    Ruthwik Junuthula, Maysam Haghdan, Kevin S Xu, and Vijay Devabhaktuni. The block point process model for continuous-time event-based dynamic networks. In The World Wide Web Conference, pages 829--839, 2019

    2019

  21. [29]

    Malliavin-stein method for the multivariate compound hawkes process

    Mahmoud Khabou. Malliavin-stein method for the multivariate compound hawkes process. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.07749, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    The Enron corpus: A new dataset for email classification research

    Bryan Klimt and Yiming Yang. The Enron corpus: A new dataset for email classification research. In Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Machine Learning, pages 217--226. Springer, 2004

    2004

  23. [31]

    A simple linear time (1+/spl epsiv/)-approximation algorithm for k-means clustering in any dimensions

    Amit Kumar, Yogish Sabharwal, and Sandeep Sen. A simple linear time (1+/spl epsiv/)-approximation algorithm for k-means clustering in any dimensions. In 45th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 454--462. IEEE, 2004

    2004

  24. [32]

    Hawkes processes

    Patrick J Laub, Thomas Taimre, and Philip K Pollett. Hawkes processes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.02822, 2015

    2015 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Bias-adjusted spectral clustering in multi-layer stochastic block models

    Jing Lei and Kevin Z Lin. Bias-adjusted spectral clustering in multi-layer stochastic block models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, pages 1--13, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Consistency of spectral clustering in stochastic block models

    Jing Lei and Alessandro Rinaldo. Consistency of spectral clustering in stochastic block models. The Annals of Statistics, 43 0 (1): 0 215--237, 2015

    2015

  27. [35]

    Inverses of 2 2 block matrices

    Tzon-Tzer Lu and Sheng-Hua Shiou. Inverses of 2 2 block matrices. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 43 0 (1-2): 0 119--129, 2002

    2002

  28. [36]

    A semiparametric extension of the stochastic block model for longitudinal networks

    Catherine Matias, Tabea Rebafka, and Fanny Villers. A semiparametric extension of the stochastic block model for longitudinal networks . Biometrika, 105 0 (3): 0 665--680, 2018

    2018

  29. [37]

    H. Minc. Nonnegative Matrices. Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Department of Mathematics, 1974. URL https://books.google.com/books?id=gAnvAAAAMAAJ

    1974

  30. [38]

    Modelling sparsity, heterogeneity, reciprocity and community structure in temporal interaction data

    Xenia Miscouridou, Francois Caron, and Yee Whye Teh. Modelling sparsity, heterogeneity, reciprocity and community structure in temporal interaction data. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 31, pages 2343--2352, 2018

    2018

  31. [39]

    Identifying peer influence in therapeutic communities adjusting for latent homophily

    Shanjukta Nath, Keith Warren, and Subhadeep Paul. Identifying peer influence in therapeutic communities adjusting for latent homophily. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 19 0 (1): 0 529--565, 2025

    2025

  32. [40]

    Large sample estimation and hypothesis testing

    Whitney K Newey and Daniel McFadden. Large sample estimation and hypothesis testing. Handbook of econometrics, 4: 0 2111--2245, 1994

    1994

  33. [41]

    Sums of random hermitian matrices and an inequality by rudelson

    Roberto Oliveira. Sums of random hermitian matrices and an inequality by rudelson. Electronic Communications in Probability, 15: 0 203--212, 2010

    2010

  34. [42]

    The mid5 dataset, 2011--2014: Procedures, coding rules, and description

    Glenn Palmer, Roseanne W McManus, Vito D’Orazio, Michael R Kenwick, Mikaela Karstens, Chase Bloch, Nick Dietrich, Kayla Kahn, Kellan Ritter, and Michael J Soules. The mid5 dataset, 2011--2014: Procedures, coding rules, and description. Conflict Management and Peace Science, pa...

    2011

  35. [43]

    Motifs in temporal networks

    Ashwin Paranjape, Austin R Benson, and Jure Leskovec. Motifs in temporal networks. In Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on web search and data mining, pages 601--610, 2017

    2017

  36. [44]

    Mutually exciting point process graphs for modeling dynamic networks

    Francesco Sanna Passino and Nicholas A Heard. Mutually exciting point process graphs for modeling dynamic networks. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 32 0 (1): 0 116--130, 2023

    2023

  37. [45]

    Spectral and matrix factorization methods for consistent community detection in multi-layer networks

    Subhadeep Paul, Yuguo Chen, et al. Spectral and matrix factorization methods for consistent community detection in multi-layer networks. The Annals of Statistics, 48 0 (1): 0 230--250, 2020

    2020

  38. [46]

    M-matrices whose inverses are totally positive

    Juan M Pe \ n a. M-matrices whose inverses are totally positive. Linear algebra and its applications, 221: 0 189--193, 1995

    1995

  39. [47]

    Continuous latent position models for instantaneous interactions

    Riccardo Rastelli and Marco Corneli. Continuous latent position models for instantaneous interactions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.17146, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Spectral clustering and the high-dimensional stochastic blockmodel

    Karl Rohe, Sourav Chatterjee, and Bin Yu. Spectral clustering and the high-dimensional stochastic blockmodel. The Annals of Statistics, 39 0 (4): 0 1878--1915, 2011

    1915

  41. [49]

    Co-clustering directed graphs to discover asymmetries and directional communities

    Karl Rohe, Tai Qin, and Bin Yu. Co-clustering directed graphs to discover asymmetries and directional communities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113 0 (45): 0 12679--12684, 2016

    2016

  42. [50]

    Gaussian embedding of temporal networks

    Rapha \"e l Romero, Jefrey Lijffijt, Riccardo Rastelli, Marco Corneli, and Tijl De Bie. Gaussian embedding of temporal networks. IEEE Access, 2023

    2023

  43. [51]

    The multivariate community hawkes model for dependent relational events in continuous-time networks

    Hadeel Soliman, Lingfei Zhao, Zhipeng Huang, Subhadeep Paul, and Kevin S Xu. The multivariate community hawkes model for dependent relational events in continuous-time networks. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 20329--20346. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  44. [52]

    Perturbation theory for the singular value decomposition

    Gilbert W Stewart. Perturbation theory for the singular value decomposition. Technical report, 1998

    1998

  45. [53]

    Second-order matrix concentration inequalities

    Joel A Tropp. Second-order matrix concentration inequalities. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 44 0 (3): 0 700--736, 2018

    2018

  46. [54]

    Bimal Viswanath, Alan Mislove, Meeyoung Cha, and Krishna P. Gummadi. On the evolution of user interaction in facebook. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Workshop on Online Social Networks, pages 37--42, 2009

    2009

  47. [55]

    Minimax sparse principal subspace estimation in high dimensions

    Vincent Q Vu and Jing Lei. Minimax sparse principal subspace estimation in high dimensions. The Annals of Statistics, 41 0 (6): 0 2905--2947, 2013

    2013

  48. [56]

    A continuous-time stochastic block model for basketball networks

    Lu Xin, Mu Zhu, and Hugh Chipman. A continuous-time stochastic block model for basketball networks. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 11 0 (2): 0 553--597, 2017

    2017

  49. [57]

    Decoupling Homophily and Reciprocity with Latent Space Network Models

    Jiasen Yang, Vinayak Rao, and Jennifer Neville. Decoupling Homophily and Reciprocity with Latent Space Network Models . In Proceedings of the Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 2017

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.