Re: [igraph] Question re local and global transitivity

[Vincent Matossian]

 Oh, of course, sorry for the confusion... I'd  read this so many times. 

I was focusing on the Watts&Strogatz definition, and fell for the name ambiguity.

The only difference between the paper and the igraph-R implementation  is that to compute the global (average) WS Transitivity, local nodes of degree 1  return NaN rather than 0 (not an issue, just an observation).

Thanks,

Vincent

On 8/27/07, Gabor Csardi <address@hidden> wrote:

Vincent,

see  http://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0303516
and Fig 5 on page 11.

G.

ps. i haven't (re)checked igraph's results now, so if you find an
error, please report it. Thank.

On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 08:40:41PM -0400, Vincent Matossian wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>
> I am trying to understand why global transitivity isn't equal to the average of
> the local?
>
> for example:
>
> erg10<-random.graph.game(10,p=0.5)
> is.connected(erg10)
> ##[1] TRUE
> transitivity(erg10)
> ##[1] 0.5757576
> mean(transitivity(erg10,type="local"))
> ##[1] 0.5204762
>
>
> In theory, shouldn't the mean and the global yield the same result?
>
> Please let me know, thanks!
>
> Vincent
>
>

> _______________________________________________
> igraph-help mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help


--
Csardi Gabor <address@hidden>    MTA RMKI, ELTE TTK


_______________________________________________
igraph-help mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help