Paper detail

Biological network comparison via Ipsen-Mikhailov distance

Highlighting similarities and differences between networks is an informative task in investigating many biological processes. Typical examples are detecting differences between an inferred network and the corresponding gold standard, or evaluating changes in a dynamic network along time. Although fruitful insights can be drawn by qualitative or feature-based methods, a distance must be used whenever a quantitative assessment is required. Here we introduce the Ipsen-Mikhailov metric for biological network comparison, based on the difference of the distributions of the Laplacian eigenvalues of the compared graphs. Being a spectral measure, its focus is on the general structure of the net so it can overcome the issues affecting local metrics such as the edit distances. Relation with the classical Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) is discussed, showing the finer discriminant resolution achieved by the Ipsen-Mikhailov metric. We conclude with three examples of application in functional genomic tasks, including stability of network reconstruction as robustness to data subsampling, variability in dynamical networks and differences in networks associated to a classification task.

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.