Papers for

neuroimaging data scientists

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Graphlets reveal detailed structural patterns in complex networks

Graphlets as structural fingerprints of complex networks

Abstract: Complex networks are often compared using selected graph-theoretical measures that capture a selected set of properties with effects ranging from local to global, such as degree, clustering or betweenness centrality. Here we introduce a structural fingerprinting framework based on graphlets: small rooted subgraphs whose distributions provide a systematic description of local-to-mesoscale topology. Across synthetic networks generated from several random graph models, graphlet fingerprints capture parameter-dependent structural differences, outperform standard graph-theoretical measures, and identify even subtle local patterns driving discrimination. We then apply the framework to empirical resting-state functional connectomes, documenting that while graphlets show superior sensitivity also to controlled topological perturbations of brain connectivity, specifically in schizophrenia-control classification they perform only comparably to classical graph-theoretical features. This is in line with the notion that schizophrenia-related alterations are dominated by spatially localized connectivity changes rather than general topological reorganization. Altogether, the generative modeling, targeted perturbations and real-world neuroimaging classification challenge position graphlets as flexible structural fingerprints of complex networks, while carefully outlining their strength and weaknesses compared to more classical graph theoretical features.

Tue 15 SeptSocial and Information Networks
The gist
Comparing complex networks often relies on simple measures that capture broad properties. The authors introduce graphlets, small network patterns, as fingerprints to describe network structure from local up to medium scales. These graphlets distinguish synthetic networks with subtle differences better than traditional metrics. When applied to brain connectivity data, graphlets detected small changes well but did not outperform classical measures in distinguishing schizophrenia. This shows graphlets are a flexible tool for capturing network topology, with strengths in some areas and limitations in others.
Open 2609.17445v1