Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 7 minor 72 references

Integrating Structure and Attributes for Transportation Network Partitioning via Optimal Transport

T0 review · 5 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-07-31 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read A single tunable optimal-transport discrepancy can partition transportation networks by structure and attributes together, instead of baking their mix into the graph up front.

desk verdict Solid applied transport methods paper: usable α-controlled srFGW partitioning on real attributed networks, incremental on the OT side, with a fair but overstated TVn win. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.24506 v1 pith:4L4QU3QH submitted 2026-07-27 stat.AP

Ketsia Guichard-Sustowski , Loïc Le Marrec , Véronique Thelen This is my paper · ORCID
classification stat.AP
keywords transportationnetworksnetworkpartitioningattributedgraphsoptimaltransportFusedGromov–Wassersteincommunitydetectiontrafficclusteringbicycle-sharingsystems
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

Transportation networks are graphs that carry both topology (who connects to whom) and messy operational attributes (speeds, traffic curves, trip-duration histograms, usage intensity). Most partitioning methods fuse those two sources early—into edge weights, a similarity matrix, or a fixed “Snake” representation—so the balance between structure and attributes is hard to dial. This paper argues that representing both structure and attributes as distance matrices, then partitioning with the semi-relaxed Fused Gromov–Wasserstein discrepancy, lets the user control that trade-off with one parameter while jointly optimizing both. On a small French road network the method recovers functional road types and traffic regimes; on London’s bike-share system it recovers usage communities that mix geography with arrival/departure profiles and self-loops. The claim is not a new universal clustering theorem, but a practical, adaptable pipeline: distance-based attributed graphs plus srFGW give partitions that bend toward connectivity or attribute homogeneity as the application demands.

What carries the argument

Semi-relaxed Fused Gromov–Wasserstein (srFGW): an optimal-transport plan that matches the source network to a small target of k super-nodes by minimizing a convex mix of attribute transport cost and structural (Gromov) distortion, with the second marginal relaxed so cluster sizes need not be fixed in advance.

What would settle it

On the same road and bike-share instances, if systematically varying the target inter-cluster distance, initialization, or hard-assignment rule erases srFGW’s reported gains in normalized total variance (or modularity/silhouette) relative to Louvain and Snake spectral clustering at matched structure–attribute balance, the claimed advantage of joint OT fusion would not hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

When transportation systems are cast as attributed graphs with separate structural and attribute distance matrices, the semi-relaxed Fused Gromov–Wasserstein discrepancy yields node partitions that jointly respect topology and heterogeneous attributes, with an explicit scalar controlling their relative weight—something early-fusion methods (weighted adjacency, Snake similarity) do not provide as cleanly.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes that a fixed simple target geometry, uniform node masses, and a k-means-started transport plan produce fair partitions whose quality the same connectivity or modularity scores used to pick the trade-off parameter can honestly measure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Traffic managers can tune one parameter toward connected regions for control strategies or toward attribute-homogeneous clusters for Macroscopic Fundamental Diagram analysis.
  • Bike-share and other OD-based systems can cluster stations by usage profiles and network role in one run, without separate weekday/weekend analyses.
  • Scalar, curve, and histogram attributes can sit in one pipeline via pairwise distances (DTW, Wasserstein-1, Euclidean) without forcing a single early fusion formula.
  • Cluster barycenters produced by the OT plan give interpretable prototype roads or stations for each community.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same distance-plus-srFGW template could extend to multimodal networks (bus+rail+bike) if each mode supplies its own attribute distance block and a shared or layered structural distance.
  • Adding an explicit connectivity penalty inside the OT objective, as the authors flag as future work, would make the method competitive for parallel simulation partitions where cut size and balance dominate.
  • Because GW matches relational roles, the framework may surface “structurally analogous but distant” components (e.g., multiple park-edge bike hubs) that local modularity methods systematically miss.
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

5 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a framework for partitioning attributed transportation graphs using the semi-relaxed Fused Gromov–Wasserstein (srFGW) discrepancy. Nodes (road segments, bike stations) are represented via heterogeneous attribute distance matrices (DTW on traffic curves, Wasserstein-1 on speed/duration histograms, Euclidean on scalars), and partitioning is cast as optimal transport from the source graph to a fixed k-node target graph with uniform inter-cluster distance mean(D_S), alternating between solving the srFGW problem and updating cluster attribute barycenters (Algorithm 1). The parameter α gives explicit control of the structure–attribute trade-off, which is the central claim. The method is demonstrated on a small French road network (Châteaubourg, dual graph of street segments with FCD attributes) and on the London Cycle Hire origin–destination network, compared against Louvain on a weighted adjacency and spectral clustering on Snake similarity.

Significance. If the results hold, the contribution is a practically useful, well-motivated application of srFGW to transportation partitioning: α gives an interpretable knob for structure–attribute fusion, and the two case studies on genuinely different network types (a primal/dual road graph and a flow-derived station graph) do demonstrate that the partitions move controllably as α and k vary (Figures 6–8, 13). The paper ships real strengths: publicly available code (GitHub, built on POT) and data (Zenodo, TfL open data), 100-repetition runs for all stochastic methods, and honest acknowledgment of limitations (no connectivity guarantee, scalability). The interpretive results — e.g., recovering a major/medium/minor road typology from normalized attributes without volume information (Table 3), and splitting the LCH west zone into functionally distinct communities — are genuinely informative. The work is incremental over [67] (same srFGW-for-clustering machinery, by overlapping authors) but the transportation-specific representation layer (Hausdorff-variant handling of two-directional attributes, distance-based unification of heterogeneous attributes) is a real contribution to this venue's reades

major comments (5)
  1. [§3.3] §3.3 (Speed Histograms): the displayed formula for W_1 is incorrect as written. W_1 between one-dimensional histograms over ordered bins equals (up to normalization) the L1 distance between the cumulative distribution functions, sum_t |F_i(t) - F_j(t)|. The formula given, (1/T) sum_t |h^(i)_t - h^(j)_t|, is a normalized L1/total-variation distance between the histograms themselves and is not shift-sensitive in the way the surrounding text claims ('sensitive to shifts, captures differences in shape'). If the implementation actually uses cumulative sums (e.g., via POT's wasserstein_1d), the formula must be corrected; if it uses the displayed formula, the distance should be renamed and the interpretation revised. This is load-bearing because the Wasserstein framing is part of the paper's claim to handle distributional attributes properly.
  2. [§4.1.3] §4.1.3, definition of TVn: 'var(C_i) denotes the variance of the attributes within cluster C_i' is underspecified. The attributes are heterogeneous — traffic curves, speed histograms, scalars — and no natural scalar 'variance of the attributes' exists. Presumably this is a length-weighted average of squared attribute distances to a cluster centroid (possibly computed per attribute distance matrix), which would make TVn essentially a normalized version of the srFGW attribute-fidelity term in Eq. (1). The exact formula must be stated, including which distance(s) enter, whether they are the min–max normalized and square-root-transformed distances of §3.3, and how the cluster reference point is defined. Without this, the paper's headline road-case result (srFGW 'by far the best' on TVn, Figure 6) cannot be assessed independently of the method's own objective.
  3. [§4.2.2] §4.2.2 and §5: the comparative claims rest partly on objective–evaluation alignment. srFGW directly minimizes within-cluster attribute distance to learned barycenters (Eq. 1), α and k are then selected by optimizing the combined connectivity / (1 - TVn) criterion (Figure 8), and the same TVn is the criterion on which srFGW is declared 'by far the best', while Louvain and Snake-spectral are scored on a criterion their objectives were not designed for. The α-sweeps do establish the narrower flexibility claim, which I find convincing; but the superiority claim needs either (a) a control in which baselines' own free parameters (resolution, adjacency-α, Snake prop) are selected by the same combined criterion and the gap is re-examined — Figure 6 partially does this but the selected operating points in Figure 9 mix parameter regimes — or (b) a held-out evaluation (e.g., attribute variance on d
  4. [§5.2.1] §5.2.1, modularity evaluation for the LCH case: the modularity formula is stated in terms of 'the adjacency matrix A_ij', but the LCH network is described with edge lengths equal to the inverse of trip counts (2454 edges after the 200-trip threshold). It is not stated whether modularity is computed on the unweighted or weighted adjacency, and whether the degrees k_i and m are weighted. Since modularity is one of the two criteria used to select α = 0.8 (Figure 13), this needs to be made explicit; the choice materially changes the criterion.
  5. [§4.1.2] Algorithm 1 and §4.1.2: no convergence analysis or diagnostics are reported for the alternating scheme (srFGW solve with fixed barycenters, then barycenter update from the soft plan, then hard assignment with the tie-breaking rule T_il > T_im or (T_il = T_im and l ≤ m)). The stopping test T_n = T_{n-1} may never trigger exactly for a non-convex solver, and the deterministic tie-breaking systematically favors low-index clusters, which can interact with empty-cluster handling (k redefined as the number of nonempty clusters each iteration). Please report observed iteration counts, objective trajectories across the 100 repetitions, and how often the maximum-iteration cap binds; a brief argument (or citation to [67]) that each step non-increases a common surrogate would strengthen the section.
minor comments (7)
  1. [§3.3] §3.3: the square-root transformation of distance matrices and β = 1/2 in d_A are justified only by 'preventing trivial clusterings'; a brief sensitivity check (e.g., β ∈ {1/4, 1/2, 3/4} in the LCH or road case) would make the equal-weighting choice less arbitrary.
  2. [§4.2.2] §4.2.2, Figure 6: the caption states k = 6 and resolution = 0.04, but the Louvain curve varies with α; since Louvain's resolution was 'adjusted to produce a comparable range', state explicitly which resolution yields k = 6 at each α, or clarify that the plotted Louvain curve is at fixed resolution with varying cluster count.
  3. [§4.1.3] §4.1.3: 'classical criteria can also be employed like.' — sentence ends abruptly after 'like'; the intended criteria (modularity, silhouette) appear after the comma. Please fix the grammar.
  4. [§2.2] §2.2: 'limited limited by their recursive clustering process' — duplicated word. Also 'the performance of this family of method' (missing 's'), §3.1 'approximatively' → 'approximately'.
  5. [Figures] Figure 9 and Figure 10: cluster colors are overloaded across figures and text (e.g., 'green', 'cyan', 'yellow' refer to different entities in Figures 9, 10, 14); a legend keyed to each map and consistent naming between figure and prose would help readability.
  6. [§5.2.1] §5.2.1: the 200-trip edge threshold and the exclusion of isolated stations/components are reasonable but their impact on the resulting communities is not quantified; one sentence on how many stations/trips are discarded and whether results are stable to, say, a 100-trip threshold would be useful.
  7. [§1] Related work: the srFGW clustering methodology closely follows [67] (same first-author group, 'under review'); please make the delta from [67] explicit in the introduction — as written, a reader must infer that the novelty here is the transportation representation layer and the two case studies, not the OT formulation itself.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

Mild objective–evaluation alignment on TVn and hyperparameter selection via the same reported criteria; method and flexibility claims remain independently specified.

  1. fitted input called prediction [§4.1.2 Eq. (1) and Algorithm 1; §4.1.3 TVn; §4.2.2 Figs. 6–8]
    "srF GW2,α(...) = min_T,B Σ ((1−α)d_A(v_i^(s), b_l)^2 + α|R_ij^(s)−R_lm^(t)|^2) T_il T_jm ... The normalized total variance is defined as: TVn = Σ l_Ci·var(C_i) / (l_G·var(G)) ... a combined criterion is defined as the arithmetic mean of the connectivity and the complement of the normalized total variance (1−TVn) ... For normalized total variance, srFGW achieves by far the best performance."

    srFGW’s attribute block and barycenter updates minimize (soft) within-cluster attribute dispersion; TVn is the same family of quantity. α and k are then chosen by maximizing a score that includes 1−TVn, and superior TVn is reported as comparative evidence. The TVn advantage is therefore partly forced by objective–metric alignment and in-sample hyperparameter selection against baselines not trained on TVn, not an independent prediction.

  2. self citation load bearing [§4.1.2; References [67]]
    "Following [67], we propose to use srFGW for partitioning attributed graphs, in particular through an appropriate specification of the target structure. ... [67] Ioana Gavra, Ketsia Guichard-Sustowski, and Loïc Le Marrec. Optimal transport-based clustering of attributed graphs with an application to road traffic data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.15570, 2025. Under review."

    The central partitioning procedure (target geometry, barycenter alternation, srFGW use for attributed graphs) is justified by citation to concurrent work with overlapping authors rather than derived in full here. This is load-bearing for the method’s legitimacy but not a uniqueness import that collapses the empirical claims; still a mild self-citation dependency on an unverified sibling manuscript.

full rationale

The paper’s core construction is not circular: srFGW (Eq. 1, Algorithm 1) is a well-specified OT objective with free trade-off α, external baselines (Louvain, Snake-spectral), and case-study maps that are not forced by definition. Two mild circularity patterns appear. First, the attribute term in srFGW is squared distance to class barycenters that Algorithm 1 updates, so low within-cluster attribute dispersion is directly optimized; §4.1.3 then defines TVn as length-weighted within-cluster attribute variance and §4.2.2 reports srFGW as “by far the best” on TVn after choosing α and k with a combined score that includes 1−TVn. That comparative TVn win is partly alignment of objective and selection rule with the metric, not an independent out-of-sample prediction—though connectivity, modularity, silhouette, and qualitative typology still carry separate content. Second, the partitioning recipe is introduced “Following [67]” (overlapping authors, under review), so the methodological premise is self-cited; it is load-bearing for the algorithm but not a uniqueness theorem that forbids alternatives, and empirical comparisons remain external. No self-definitional identity, fitted-as-prediction of a forced ratio, or renaming of a known law is present. Score 3 reflects real but limited circularity concentrated on the TVn superiority rhetoric and metric-tuned hyperparameters, not on the flexibility claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central empirical claim rests on standard OT/graph assumptions plus several modeling choices that fix how structure and heterogeneous attributes enter the cost. Free parameters α, k, Snake length, Louvain resolution, distance mix weights, and edge-filter thresholds are selected on the evaluation criteria. No new physical entities are postulated; the ‘target graph’ and attribute barycenters are algorithmic constructs.

free parameters (6)
  • α (structure–attribute weight in srFGW) = 0.8 (illustration); 0.7 (city-center roads); 0.8 (LCH)
    Primary trade-off knob; swept in [0.1,0.9] and chosen via combined connectivity/TVn or modularity/silhouette (§4.1.3, §5).
  • k (max / target number of clusters) = 6 or 8 depending on subsection
    Chosen in small integer ranges [4,8] by the same combined criteria and interpretability.
  • β attribute mix (flow vs speed) and equal weights on five LCH distances = β=1/2 roads; equal weights LCH
    Hand-set combination of heterogeneous attribute distances after square-root and min-max (§3.3, §5.2).
  • δ^(t) = mean(D_S) inter-cluster target distance = mean shortest-path distance of source
    Fixes target geometry following [67]; not learned from labels.
  • LCH edge threshold (≥200 trips) and edge length = 1/trip count = 200 trips/year; inverse usage
    Defines which station pairs exist and structural distances; changes community graph.
  • Snake proportion / Louvain resolution for baselines = resolution ∈[0.02,0.10]; 1−Snake_prop ∈[0.1,0.9]
    Baseline hyperparameters swept for comparable k and structure–attribute balance (§4.2).
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Semi-relaxed Fused Gromov–Wasserstein is a valid joint discrepancy for structure and node features; relaxing the target marginal is appropriate when cluster sizes are unknown.
    Invoked throughout §4.1 via [65],[66],[67]; not re-proved here.
  • domain assumption Shortest-path distances on the dual (or usage) graph plus chosen attribute metrics adequately encode ‘structure’ and ‘operations’ for partitioning objectives.
    §3.2–3.3 dual construction, DTW/W1/Hausdorff/Euclidean choices.
  • domain assumption Hard clusters from argmax of the optimal coupling, with barycenters as attribute prototypes, are the right readout for transportation use cases.
    Algorithm 1 optional hard-assignment step; used for all maps and metrics.
  • ad hoc to paper Min–max (and square-root) normalization makes heterogeneous distances commensurable so a single α is meaningful.
    §3.3 transformations motivated to avoid trivial speed-driven splits; not derived from a uniqueness principle.
  • domain assumption Connectivity/TVn (roads) and modularity/silhouette (LCH), possibly averaged after min–max, are sufficient proxies for partition quality.
    §4.1.3 and §5 evaluation design; no external operational loss.
invented entities (1)
  • Target cluster graph with uniform inter-cluster distance mean(D_S) and learned attribute barycenters B independent evidence
    purpose: Turns srFGW matching into a clustering problem with joint structure/attribute cost.
    Standard device in GW clustering literature and [67]; algorithmic, not a new physical object.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Integrating Structure and Attributes for Transportation Network Partitioning via Optimal Transport." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4L4QU3QH

@misc{pith2026260724506,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Integrating Structure and Attributes for Transportation Network Partitioning via Optimal Transport},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4L4QU3QH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.24506}
}
read the original abstract

Transportation network partitioning is essential for applications such as traffic analysis, simulation, and mobility pattern identification. However, transportation networks combine structural information with heterogeneous operational attributes, ranging from scalar indicators to temporal profiles. Existing approaches generally rely on predefined formulations to integrate these sources of information, limiting the ability to control their relative influence. This paper proposes a flexible framework for partitioning heterogeneous transportation networks represented as attributed graphs. The proposed methodology relies on a distance-based graph representation and an optimal transport formulation based on the semi-relaxed Fused Gromov-Wasserstein discrepancy, enabling joint consideration of network structure and attributes with explicit control over their trade-off. The proposed methodology is evaluated on two transportation systems with distinct characteristics: an urban road network for traffic-oriented partitioning and a bicycle-sharing system for identifying usage-based communities. Results demonstrate the ability of the framework to adapt the resulting partitions according to different structural and attribute preferences.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.24506 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Road network of Chateaubourg ˆ Raw FCD data collected in 2022 provide speed statistics and vehicle counts. In this study, a pre-processed and 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the attributes associated with a road segment: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Normalized combined α-distance to a road located in the city center for different values of α. a Gaussian kernel, where similarity decreases exponentially with the squared distance. The kernel scale is controlled by a bandwidth parameter σ, typically estimated from the data (here taken as the median of pairwise distances). sij = exp  − dα(vi , vj ) 2 2σ 2  . The Snake similarity strongly depends on either the Snak… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalized Snake similarity to a road located in the city center for different Snake lengths, expressed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Results of spectral clustering into 6 groups using different inputs: weighted adjacency, combined [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Evolution of connectivity and normalized total variance with respect to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Evolution of connectivity and normalized total variance with respect to number of clusters for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Heatmap of connectivity, normalized total variance and combined criterion with respect to number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Partitions obtained by Louvain (resolution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Clusters obtained by srFGW partitioning for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: London Cycle Hire network, constructed from 2024 usage data. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Illustration of the attributes associated with a station: normalized incoming and outgoing traffic, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Heatmap of modularity, silhouette and combined criterion with respect to number of cluster and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Clusters obtained by srFGW partitioning for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Inter-cluster traffic flow patterns and their normalized distributions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_15.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [67]

    Optimal transport-based clustering of attributed graphs with an application to road traffic data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.15570, 2025

    Ioana Gavra, Ketsia Guichard-Sustowski, and Lo ¨ıc Le Marrec. Optimal transport-based clustering of attributed graphs with an application to road traffic data.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.15570, 2025. Under review

    arXiv 2025

  2. [1]

    Complex network topology of transportation systems.Transport reviews, 33(6):658–685, 2013

    Jingyi Lin and Yifang Ban. Complex network topology of transportation systems.Transport reviews, 33(6):658–685, 2013

    2013

  3. [2]

    The network analysis of urban streets: a primal approach

    Sergio Porta, Paolo Crucitti, and Vito Latora. The network analysis of urban streets: a primal approach. Environment and Planning B: planning and design, 33(5):705–725, 2006

    2006

  4. [3]

    The network analysis of urban streets: a dual approach

    Sergio Porta, Paolo Crucitti, and Vito Latora. The network analysis of urban streets: a dual approach. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 369(2):853–866, 2006

    2006

  5. [4]

    Network harness: Metropo- lis public transport.Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 380:585–591, 2007

    Christian von Ferber, Taras Holovatch, Yu Holovatch, and Vasyl Palchykov. Network harness: Metropo- lis public transport.Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 380:585–591, 2007. 30

    2007

  6. [5]

    Role of road network features in the evaluation of incident impacts on urban traffic mobility.Transportation research part B: methodological, 117:101–116, 2018

    Chenshuo Sun, Xin Pei, Junheng Hao, Yewen Wang, Zuo Zhang, and SC Wong. Role of road network features in the evaluation of incident impacts on urban traffic mobility.Transportation research part B: methodological, 117:101–116, 2018

    2018

  7. [6]

    Statistical analysis of 22 public transport networks in poland

    Julian Sienkiewicz and Janusz A Hołyst. Statistical analysis of 22 public transport networks in poland. Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 72(4):046127, 2005

    2005

  8. [7]

    Enforcing optimal routing through dynamic avoid- ance maps.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 149:118–137, 2021

    Ludovic Leclercq, Andres Ladino, and C´ecile Becarie. Enforcing optimal routing through dynamic avoid- ance maps.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 149:118–137, 2021

    2021

Show all 72 references
  1. [8]

    On the spatial partitioning of urban transportation networks.Trans- portation Research Part B: Methodological, 46(10):1639–1656, 2012

    Yuxuan Ji and Nikolas Geroliminis. On the spatial partitioning of urban transportation networks.Trans- portation Research Part B: Methodological, 46(10):1639–1656, 2012

    2012

  2. [9]

    Identification of communities in urban mobility networks using multi-layer graphs of network traffic.Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 89:254–267, 2018

    Mehmet Yildirimoglu and Jiwon Kim. Identification of communities in urban mobility networks using multi-layer graphs of network traffic.Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 89:254–267, 2018

    2018

  3. [10]

    A statistical method for estimating predictable differences between daily traffic flow profiles.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 95:196–213, 2017

    Fiona Crawford, David Paul Watling, and Richard Dominic Connors. A statistical method for estimating predictable differences between daily traffic flow profiles.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 95:196–213, 2017

    2017

  4. [11]

    Valuing travel time variability: Characteristics of the travel time distribution on an urban road.Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 24:83–101, 2012

    Mogens Fosgerau and Daisuke Fukuda. Valuing travel time variability: Characteristics of the travel time distribution on an urban road.Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 24:83–101, 2012

    2012

  5. [12]

    Clustering of heterogeneous networks with directional flows based on “snake” similarities.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 91:250– 269, 2016

    Mohammadreza Saeedmanesh and Nikolas Geroliminis. Clustering of heterogeneous networks with directional flows based on “snake” similarities.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 91:250– 269, 2016

    2016

  6. [13]

    Current trends in road traffic network division for distributed or parallel road traffic simulation

    Tomas Potuzak. Current trends in road traffic network division for distributed or parallel road traffic simulation. In2022 IEEE/ACM 26th International Symposium on Distributed Simulation and Real Time Applications (DS-RT), pages 77–86. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  7. [14]

    A decomposition approach to the static traffic assignment problem.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 105:270–296, 2017

    Ehsan Jafari, Venktesh Pandey, and Stephen D Boyles. A decomposition approach to the static traffic assignment problem.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 105:270–296, 2017

    2017

  8. [15]

    A partitioning strategy for nonuniform problems on multiproces- sors.IEEE Transactions on Computers, 100(5):570–580, 1987

    Marsha Berger and Shadid Bokhari. A partitioning strategy for nonuniform problems on multiproces- sors.IEEE Transactions on Computers, 100(5):570–580, 1987

    1987

  9. [16]

    Spartsim: A space partitioning guided by road network for distributed traffic simulations

    Anthony Ventresque, Quentin Bragard, Elvis S Liu, Dawid Nowak, Liam Murphy, Georgios Theodor- opoulos, and Qi Liu. Spartsim: A space partitioning guided by road network for distributed traffic simulations. In2012 IEEE/ACM 16th International Symposium on Distributed Simulation ...

    2012

  10. [17]

    Zhiyuan Liu, Shen Xie, Honggang Zhang, Dinghao Zhou, and Yuwei Yang. A parallel computing frame- work for large-scale microscopic traffic simulation based on spectral partitioning.Transportation Re- search Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 181:103368, 2024

    2024

  11. [18]

    Vu, and Christopher Leckie

    Tarique Anwar, Chengfei Liu, Hai L. Vu, and Christopher Leckie. Spatial partitioning of large urban road networks. InAdvances in Database Technology – EDBT 2014: 17th International Conference on Extending Database Technology, Proceedings. OpenProceedings, 2014. 31

    2014

  12. [19]

    Road network partitioning method based on canopyk-means clustering algorithm.Archives of Transport, 54(2):95–106, 2020

    Xiaohui Lin and Jianmin Xu. Road network partitioning method based on canopyk-means clustering algorithm.Archives of Transport, 54(2):95–106, 2020

    2020

  13. [20]

    Dynamics of heterogeneity in urban net- works: aggregated traffic modeling and hierarchical control.Transportation Research Part B: Method- ological, 74:1–19, 2015

    Mohsen Ramezani, Jack Haddad, and Nikolas Geroliminis. Dynamics of heterogeneity in urban net- works: aggregated traffic modeling and hierarchical control.Transportation Research Part B: Method- ological, 74:1–19, 2015

    2015

  14. [21]

    Mode differentiation in par- titioning of mixed bi-modal urban networks.Transportmetrica B: Transport Dynamics, 11(1):463–485, 2023

    Mansour Johari, Shang Jiang, Mehdi Keyvan-Ekbatani, and Dong Ngoduy. Mode differentiation in par- titioning of mixed bi-modal urban networks.Transportmetrica B: Transport Dynamics, 11(1):463–485, 2023

    2023

  15. [22]

    Exploring dynamic urban mobility patterns from traffic flow data using community detection.Annals of GIS, 30(4):435–454, 2024

    Jinli Liu and Yihong Yuan. Exploring dynamic urban mobility patterns from traffic flow data using community detection.Annals of GIS, 30(4):435–454, 2024

    2024

  16. [23]

    Comparing community detection algorithms in transport networks via points of interest.IEEE Access, 6:29729–29738, 2018

    Liping Huang, Yongjian Yang, Hepeng Gao, Xuehua Zhao, and Zhanwei Du. Comparing community detection algorithms in transport networks via points of interest.IEEE Access, 6:29729–29738, 2018

    2018

  17. [24]

    Analyzing a multilayer comprehen- sive passenger transport network through overlapping community detection.Transportation Research Record, 2678(11):1517–1532, 2024

    Fengjie Xie, Ruiyi Ma, Yuwei Cao, Cuiping Ren, and Xueyan Zhou. Analyzing a multilayer comprehen- sive passenger transport network through overlapping community detection.Transportation Research Record, 2678(11):1517–1532, 2024

    2024

  18. [25]

    Designing bike networks using the concept of network clusters.Applied network science, 3(1):12, 2018

    Meisam Akbarzadeh, Syed Sina Mohri, and Ehsan Yazdian. Designing bike networks using the concept of network clusters.Applied network science, 3(1):12, 2018

    2018

  19. [26]

    The structure of spatial networks and communities in bicycle sharing systems.PloS One, 8(9):e74685, 2013

    Martin Zaltz Austwick, Oliver O’Brien, Emanuele Strano, and Matheus Viana. The structure of spatial networks and communities in bicycle sharing systems.PloS One, 8(9):e74685, 2013

    2013

  20. [27]

    Exploring the spatiotemporal patterns of shared bicycle usage: a case study of metrobike in austin, texas.Computational Urban Science, 5(1):52, 2025

    Yubin Lee, Farhaan Cooverji, and Yihong Yuan. Exploring the spatiotemporal patterns of shared bicycle usage: a case study of metrobike in austin, texas.Computational Urban Science, 5(1):52, 2025

    2025

  21. [28]

    Study on community detection method for morning and evening peak shared bicycle trips in urban areas: A case study of six districts in beijing

    Yao Sun, Zheng Wen, Dongwei Tian, Man Zhang, and Yue Hou. Study on community detection method for morning and evening peak shared bicycle trips in urban areas: A case study of six districts in beijing. Buildings, 13(10):2446, 2023

    2023

  22. [29]

    A survey of kernel and spectral methods for clustering.Pattern recognition, 41(1):176–190, 2008

    Maurizio Filippone, Francesco Camastra, Francesco Masulli, and Stefano Rovetta. A survey of kernel and spectral methods for clustering.Pattern recognition, 41(1):176–190, 2008

    2008

  23. [30]

    An efficient heuristic procedure for partitioning graphs.The Bell system technical journal, 49(2):291–307, 1970

    Brian W Kernighan and Shen Lin. An efficient heuristic procedure for partitioning graphs.The Bell system technical journal, 49(2):291–307, 1970

    1970

  24. [31]

    Metis: A software package for partitioning unstructured graphs, partitioning meshes, and computing fill-reducing orderings of sparse matrices

    George Karypis and Vipin Kumar. Metis: A software package for partitioning unstructured graphs, partitioning meshes, and computing fill-reducing orderings of sparse matrices. Technical Report 97-061, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota, 1997

    1997

  25. [32]

    Partitioning of urban transportation networks utilizing real-world traffic parameters for distributed simulation in sumo

    Md Salman Ahmed and Mohammad A Hoque. Partitioning of urban transportation networks utilizing real-world traffic parameters for distributed simulation in sumo. In2016 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference (VNC), pages 1–4. IEEE, 2016. 32

    2016

  26. [33]

    A graph partitioning algorithm for parallel agent-based road traffic simulation

    Yadong Xu, Wentong Cai, David Eckhoff, Suraj Nair, and Alois Knoll. A graph partitioning algorithm for parallel agent-based road traffic simulation. InProceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSIM conference on principles of advanced discrete simulation, pages 209–219, 2017

    2017

  27. [34]

    Normalized cuts and image segmentation.IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 22(8):888–905, 2000

    Jianbo Shi and Jitendra Malik. Normalized cuts and image segmentation.IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 22(8):888–905, 2000

    2000

  28. [35]

    Investigating transport network vulnerability by capacity weighted spectral analysis.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 99:251–266, 2017

    Michael GH Bell, Fumitaka Kurauchi, Supun Perera, and Walter Wong. Investigating transport network vulnerability by capacity weighted spectral analysis.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 99:251–266, 2017

    2017

  29. [36]

    Evolutionary spectral clustering by incorporating temporal smoothness

    Yun Chi, Xiaodan Song, Dengyong Zhou, Koji Hino, and Belle L Tseng. Evolutionary spectral clustering by incorporating temporal smoothness. InProceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 153–162, 2007

    2007

  30. [37]

    Partitioning of transporta- tion networks by efficient evolutionary clustering and density peaks.Algorithms, 15(3):76, 2022

    Pamela Al Alam, Joseph Constantin, Ibtissam Constantin, and Clelia Lopez. Partitioning of transporta- tion networks by efficient evolutionary clustering and density peaks.Algorithms, 15(3):76, 2022

    2022

  31. [38]

    Symnmf: nonnegative low-rank approximation of a simi- larity matrix for graph clustering.Journal of Global Optimization, 62(3):545–574, 2015

    Da Kuang, Sangwoon Yun, and Haesun Park. Symnmf: nonnegative low-rank approximation of a simi- larity matrix for graph clustering.Journal of Global Optimization, 62(3):545–574, 2015

    2015

  32. [39]

    A new combinatorial characteristic parameter for clustering-based traffic network partitioning.IEEE Access, 7:40175–40182, 2019

    Duanyang Liu, Mengting Wang, and Guojiang Shen. A new combinatorial characteristic parameter for clustering-based traffic network partitioning.IEEE Access, 7:40175–40182, 2019

    2019

  33. [40]

    Finding community structure in very large networks.Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 70(6):066111, 2004

    Aaron Clauset, Mark EJ Newman, and Cristopher Moore. Finding community structure in very large networks.Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 70(6):066111, 2004

    2004

  34. [41]

    Fast unfolding of communities in large networks.Journal of statistical mechanics: theory and experiment, 2008(10):P10008, 2008

    Vincent D Blondel, Jean-Loup Guillaume, Renaud Lambiotte, and Etienne Lefebvre. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks.Journal of statistical mechanics: theory and experiment, 2008(10):P10008, 2008

    2008

  35. [42]

    Shared bicycles in a city: A signal processing and data analysis perspective.Advances in Complex Sys- tems, 14(03):415–438, 2011

    Pierre Borgnat, Patrice Abry, Patrick Flandrin, C´eline Robardet, Jean-Baptiste Rouquier, and Eric Fleury. Shared bicycles in a city: A signal processing and data analysis perspective.Advances in Complex Sys- tems, 14(03):415–438, 2011

    2011

  36. [43]

    Multi-scale analysis of the european airspace using network community de- tection.PloS One, 9(5):e94414, 2014

    G ´erald Gurtner, Stefania Vitali, Marco Cipolla, Fabrizio Lillo, Rosario Nunzio Mantegna, Salvatore Mic- ciche, and Simone Pozzi. Multi-scale analysis of the european airspace using network community de- tection.PloS One, 9(5):e94414, 2014

    2014

  37. [44]

    General optimization tech- nique for high-quality community detection in complex networks.Physical Review E, 90(1):012811, 2014

    Stanislav Sobolevsky, Riccardo Campari, Alexander Belyi, and Carlo Ratti. General optimization tech- nique for high-quality community detection in complex networks.Physical Review E, 90(1):012811, 2014

    2014

  38. [45]

    Identifying spatial structure of travel modes through community detection method

    Jun Li and Wenna Zhang. Identifying spatial structure of travel modes through community detection method. In2016 IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Engineering (ICITE), pages 227–231. IEEE, 2016

    2016

  39. [46]

    From louvain to leiden: guaranteeing well- connected communities.Scientific reports, 9(1):1–12, 2019

    Vincent A Traag, Ludo Waltman, and Nees Jan Van Eck. From louvain to leiden: guaranteeing well- connected communities.Scientific reports, 9(1):1–12, 2019. 33

    2019

  40. [47]

    Jiwoo Kim and Gunhak Lee. Detecting urban community based on urban mobility patterns from the public transportation trip-chain data: A case study of seoul, south korea.International Regional Science Review, 2025

    2025

  41. [48]

    Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure.Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 105(4):1118–1123, 2008

    Martin Rosvall and Carl T Bergstrom. Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure.Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 105(4):1118–1123, 2008

    2008

  42. [49]

    Computing communities in large networks using random walks

    Pascal Pons and Matthieu Latapy. Computing communities in large networks using random walks. Journal of graph algorithms and applications, 10(2):191–218, 2006

    2006

  43. [50]

    How good is recursive bisection?SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 18(5):1436–1445, 1997

    Horst D Simon and Shang-Hua Teng. How good is recursive bisection?SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 18(5):1436–1445, 1997

    1997

  44. [51]

    An improved road network partition algorithm for parallel micro- scopic traffic simulation

    Dali Wei, Feng Chen, and Xinxin Sun. An improved road network partition algorithm for parallel micro- scopic traffic simulation. In2010 international conference on mechanic automation and control engineering, pages 2777–2782. IEEE, 2010

    2010

  45. [52]

    Algorithm as 136: Ak-means clustering algorithm.Journal of the royal statistical society

    John A Hartigan and Manchek A Wong. Algorithm as 136: Ak-means clustering algorithm.Journal of the royal statistical society. Series c (applied statistics), 28(1):100–108, 1979

    1979

  46. [53]

    Generalized net- work voronoi diagrams: Concepts, computational methods, and applications.International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 22(9):965–994, 2008

    Atsuyuki Okabe, Toshiaki Satoh, Takehiro Furuta, Atsuo Suzuki, and Kyoko Okano. Generalized net- work voronoi diagrams: Concepts, computational methods, and applications.International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 22(9):965–994, 2008

    2008

  47. [54]

    A spatio-temporal co-clustering framework for discovering mobility patterns: A study of manhattan taxi data.IEEE Access, 9:34338– 34351, 2021

    Qian Liu, Xinqi Zheng, H Eugene Stanley, Fei Xiao, and Wenchao Liu. A spatio-temporal co-clustering framework for discovering mobility patterns: A study of manhattan taxi data.IEEE Access, 9:34338– 34351, 2021

    2021

  48. [55]

    Victs: A novel network partition algorithm for scal- able agent-based modeling of mass evacuation.Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 80:101452, 2020

    Dandong Yin, Shaowen Wang, and Yanfeng Ouyang. Victs: A novel network partition algorithm for scal- able agent-based modeling of mass evacuation.Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 80:101452, 2020

    2020

  49. [56]

    Survey of spectral clustering based on graph theory.Pattern Recognition, 151:110366, 2024

    Ling Ding, Chao Li, Di Jin, and Shifei Ding. Survey of spectral clustering based on graph theory.Pattern Recognition, 151:110366, 2024

    2024

  50. [57]

    Finding and evaluating community structure in networks.Phys- ical review E, 69(2):026113, 2004

    Mark EJ Newman and Michelle Girvan. Finding and evaluating community structure in networks.Phys- ical review E, 69(2):026113, 2004

    2004

  51. [58]

    Finding overlapping communities in multilayer networks.PloS One, 13(4):e0188747, 2018

    Weiyi Liu, Toyotaro Suzumura, Hongyu Ji, and Guangmin Hu. Finding overlapping communities in multilayer networks.PloS One, 13(4):e0188747, 2018

    2018

  52. [59]

    Least squares quantization in pcm.IEEE transactions on information theory, 28(2):129–137, 1982

    Stuart Lloyd. Least squares quantization in pcm.IEEE transactions on information theory, 28(2):129–137, 1982

    1982

  53. [60]

    Dynamic time warping algorithm review.Information and Computer Science Department University of Hawaii at Manoa Honolulu, USA, 855(1-23):40, 2008

    Pavel Senin. Dynamic time warping algorithm review.Information and Computer Science Department University of Hawaii at Manoa Honolulu, USA, 855(1-23):40, 2008

    2008

  54. [61]

    A modified hausdorff distance for object matching

    M-P Dubuisson and Anil K Jain. A modified hausdorff distance for object matching. InProceedings of 12th international conference on pattern recognition, volume 1, pages 566–568. IEEE, 1994. 34

    1994

  55. [62]

    Community detection in node-attributed social networks: a survey.Computer Science Review, 37:100286, 2020

    Petr Chunaev. Community detection in node-attributed social networks: a survey.Computer Science Review, 37:100286, 2020

    2020

  56. [63]

    Gromov-wasserstein averaging of kernel and distance matrices

    Gabriel Peyr ´e, Marco Cuturi, and Justin Solomon. Gromov-wasserstein averaging of kernel and distance matrices. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 2664–2672. PMLR, 2016

    2016

  57. [64]

    Gromov–wasserstein distances and the metric approach to object matching.Founda- tions of computational mathematics, 11(4):417–487, 2011

    Facundo M ´emoli. Gromov–wasserstein distances and the metric approach to object matching.Founda- tions of computational mathematics, 11(4):417–487, 2011

    2011

  58. [65]

    Semi-relaxed gromov-wasserstein divergence with applications on graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.02753, 2021

    C ´edric Vincent-Cuaz, R ´emi Flamary, Marco Corneli, Titouan Vayer, and Nicolas Courty. Semi-relaxed gromov-wasserstein divergence with applications on graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.02753, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  59. [66]

    Optimal transport for structured data with application on graphs

    Titouan Vayer, Nicolas Courty, Romain Tavenard, and R ´emi Flamary. Optimal transport for structured data with application on graphs. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning, pages 6275–6284. PMLR, 2019

    2019

  60. [68]

    Pot: Python optimal transport.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22(78):1–8, 2021

    R ´emi Flamary, Nicolas Courty, Alexandre Gramfort, Mokhtar Z Alaya, Aur ´elie Boisbunon, Stanislas Chambon, Laetitia Chapel, Adrien Corenflos, Kilian Fatras, Nemo Fournier, et al. Pot: Python optimal transport.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22(78):1–8, 2021

    2021

  61. [69]

    Cross- comparison of network clustering methods: Potential macroscopic fundamental diagram (mfd)-based applications.Transportation Research Record, 2679(12):514–532, 2025

    Yamam Alayasreih, Gabriel Tilg, Florian Dandl, Mehdi Keyvan-Ekbatani, and Klaus Bogenberger. Cross- comparison of network clustering methods: Potential macroscopic fundamental diagram (mfd)-based applications.Transportation Research Record, 2679(12):514–532, 2025

    2025

  62. [70]

    Modularity and community structure in networks.Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 103(23):8577–8582, 2006

    Mark EJ Newman. Modularity and community structure in networks.Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 103(23):8577–8582, 2006

    2006

  63. [71]

    Lessons from thirteen years of the london cycle hire scheme: A review of evidence.Multimodal Transportation, 3(3):100156, 2024

    Yingheng Zhang, Haojie Li, and Gang Ren. Lessons from thirteen years of the london cycle hire scheme: A review of evidence.Multimodal Transportation, 3(3):100156, 2024

    2024

  64. [72]

    Community structures, interactions and dynamics in london’s bicycle sharing network

    Fernando Munoz-Mendez, Ke Han, Konstantin Klemmer, and Stephen Jarvis. Community structures, interactions and dynamics in london’s bicycle sharing network. InProceedings of the 2018 ACM inter- national joint conference and 2018 international symposium on pervasive and ubiquito...

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed July 31, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.