Machine learning

Machine learning (ML) is a field of study in artificial intelligence concerned with the development and study of statistical algorithms that can learn from data and generalize to unseen data, and thus perform tasks without being explicitly programmed. Advances in the field of deep learning have allowed neural networks, a class of statistical algorithms, to surpass many previous machine learning approaches in performance. Statistics and mathematical optimisation methods compose the foundations of machine learning. Data mining is a related field of study, focusing on exploratory data analysis (EDA) through unsupervised learning. From a theoretical viewpoint, probably approximately correct learning provides a mathematical and statistical framework for describing machine learning. Most traditional machine learning and deep learning algorithms can be described as empirical risk minimisation under this framework. == History == The term machine learning was coined in 1959 by Arthur Samuel, an IBM employee and pioneer in the field of computer gaming and artificial intelligence. The synonym self-teaching computers was also used during this time period. The earliest machine learning program was introduced in the 1950s, when Samuel invented a computer program that calculated the chance of winning in checkers for each side, but the history of machine learning is rooted in decades of efforts to study human cognitive processes. In 1949, Canadian psychologist Donald Hebb published the book The Organization of Behavior, in which he introduced a theoretical neural structure formed by certain interactions among nerve cells. The Hebbian theory of neuron interaction set the groundwork for how many machine learning algorithms work, with connected artificial neurons changing the strength of their connections based on data. Other researchers who have studied human cognitive systems contributed to the modern machine learning technologies as well, including Walter Pitts and Warren McCulloch, who proposed the first mathematical model of neural networks including algorithms that mirror human thought processes. By the early 1960s, an experimental "learning machine" with punched tape memory, called Cybertron, had been developed by Raytheon Company to analyse sonar signals, electrocardiograms, and speech patterns using rudimentary reinforcement learning. It was repetitively "trained" by a human operator/teacher to recognise patterns and equipped with a "goof" button to cause it to reevaluate incorrect decisions. A representative book on research into machine learning during the 1960s was Nils Nilsson's book "Learning Machines", dealing mostly with machine learning for pattern classification. Interest related to pattern recognition continued into the 1970s, as described by Duda and Hart in 1973. In 1981, a report was given on using teaching strategies so that an artificial neural network learns to recognise 40 characters (26 letters, 10 digits, and 4 special symbols) from a computer terminal. Tom M. Mitchell provided a widely quoted, more formal definition of the algorithms studied in the machine learning field: "A computer program is said to learn from experience E with respect to some class of tasks T and performance measure P if its performance at tasks in T, as measured by P, improves with experience E." This definition of the tasks in which machine learning is concerned is fundamentally operational rather than defining the field in cognitive terms. This follows Alan Turing's proposal in his paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence", in which the question, "Can machines think?", is replaced by asking whether machines can convincingly imitate a human in its responses to human-posed questions. In 2014 Ian Goodfellow and others introduced generative adversarial networks (GANs) which could produce realistic synthetic data. By 2016 AlphaGo had won against top human players in Go using reinforcement learning techniques. == Relationships to other fields == === Artificial intelligence === As a scientific endeavour, machine learning grew out of the quest for artificial intelligence (AI). In the early days of AI as an academic discipline, some researchers were interested in having machines learn from data. They attempted to approach the problem with various symbolic methods, as well as what were then termed "neural networks"; these were mostly perceptrons and other models that were later found to be reinventions of the generalised linear models of statistics. Probabilistic reasoning was also employed, especially in automated medical diagnosis. However, an increasing emphasis on the logical, knowledge-based approach caused a rift between AI and machine learning. Probabilistic systems were plagued by theoretical and practical problems of data acquisition and representation. By 1980, expert systems had come to dominate AI, and statistics was out of favour. Work on symbolic/knowledge-based learning continued within AI, leading to inductive logic programming (ILP), but the more statistical line of research was now outside the field of AI proper, in pattern recognition and information retrieval. Neural network research was abandoned by AI and computer science around the same time. This subfield, termed "connectionism", was continued by researchers from other disciplines, including John Hopfield, David Rumelhart, and Geoffrey Hinton. Their main success came in the mid-1980s with the reinvention of backpropagation. Machine learning (ML), reorganised and recognised as its own field, started to flourish in the 1990s. The field changed its goal from achieving artificial intelligence to tackling solvable problems of a practical nature. It shifted focus away from the symbolic approaches it had inherited from AI, and toward methods and models borrowed from statistics, fuzzy logic, and probability theory. === Data compression === === Data mining === Machine learning and data mining often employ the same methods and overlap significantly, but while machine learning focuses on prediction based on known properties learned from the training data, data mining focuses on the discovery of previously unknown properties in the data (this is the analysis step of knowledge discovery in databases). Data mining uses many machine learning methods, but with different goals; on the other hand, machine learning also employs data mining methods as "unsupervised learning" or as a preprocessing step to improve learner accuracy. Much of the confusion between these two research communities comes from the basic assumptions they work with: in machine learning, performance is usually evaluated with respect to the ability to reproduce known knowledge, while in knowledge discovery and data mining (KDD) the key task is the discovery of previously unknown knowledge. Evaluated with respect to known knowledge, an uninformed (unsupervised) method will easily be outperformed by other supervised methods, while in a typical KDD task, supervised methods cannot be used due to the unavailability of training data. Machine learning also has intimate ties to optimization: Many learning problems are formulated as minimisation of some loss function on a training set of examples. Loss functions express the discrepancy between the predictions of the model being trained and the actual problem instances (for example, in classification, one wants to assign a label to instances, and models are trained to correctly predict the preassigned labels of a set of examples). === Generalization === Characterizing the generalisation of various learning algorithms is an active topic of current research, especially for deep learning algorithms. === Statistics === Machine learning and statistics are closely related fields in terms of methods, but distinct in their principal goal: statistics draws population inferences from a sample, while machine learning finds generalisable predictive patterns. Conventional statistical analyses require the a priori selection of a model most suitable for the study data set. In addition, only significant or theoretically relevant variables based on previous experience are included for analysis. In contrast, machine learning is not built on a pre-structured model; rather, the data shape the model by detecting underlying patterns. The more variables (input) used to train the model, the more accurate the ultimate model will be. Leo Breiman distinguished two statistical modelling paradigms: the data model and the algorithmic model, wherein "algorithmic model" means more or less the machine learning algorithms like Random forest. Some statisticians have adopted methods from machine learning, producing the field of statistical learning. === Statistical physics === Analytical and computational techniques derived from deep-rooted physics of disordered systems can be extended to large-scale problems, including machine learning, e.g., to analyse the weight space of deep neural networks. Statistical physics is thus

Web intelligence

Web intelligence is the area of scientific research and development that explores the roles and makes use of artificial intelligence and information technology for new products, services and frameworks that are empowered by the World Wide Web. The term was coined in a paper written by Ning Zhong, Jiming Liu Yao and Y.Y. Ohsuga in the Computer Software and Applications Conference in 2000. == Research == The research about the web intelligence covers many fields – including data mining (in particular web mining), information retrieval, pattern recognition, predictive analytics, the semantic web, web data warehousing – typically with a focus on web personalization and adaptive websites.

Education by algorithm

Education by algorithm refers to automated solutions that algorithmic agents or social bots offer to education, to assist with mundane educational tasks. These are often instrumentalist “educational reforms” or “curriculum transformations”, which have been implemented by policy makers and are supported by proprietary education technologies. New educational policies, mandated by transnational governance forums (like the OECD), have manufactured a connection between economies and education. Governments, schools and universities are expected to introduce or prepare students for an “unknown future”, to “future proof” them against an identified issue or to mitigate a national crisis. Technologies are seen as a catalyst to effect these changes. However, these policies mask a deeper problem, which include the assetization of education and the use of technologies as a means for surveillance and behavior modification. The traces that students and leave, through cookies, logins learning activities, assignments and tests, are collected, facetted, and shared with commercial organizations by these agents, to both predict future behavior and shape it. Techno solutionist thinking has led to managers adopting educational policies and reforms, and looking towards technologies to act as disrupters, liberators or agents to improve efficiency. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many more students had to modify their learning and working circumstances to protect themselves. Academics shifted their assessment practices from the dominant assessment of learning paradigm to an orientation that saw value in "assessment for learning". Big tech assisted, and teaching infrastructure became further privatized, and unbundling of education provision went a step further. Following the return to class, this assessment paradigm became rationalised in education. Leaving the space for algorithmic agents to step in. Academics work was increasingly driven by learning experience platforms and student understanding was extended through interleaving, behavior modification nudges and rewards and scheduled high stakes assessments. This data collection may also be construed as surveillance., or perceived as evidence of a Fourth Industrial Revolution

Dependency network (graphical model)

Dependency networks (DNs) are graphical models, similar to Markov networks, wherein each vertex (node) corresponds to a random variable and each edge captures dependencies among variables. Unlike Bayesian networks, DNs may contain cycles. Each node is associated to a conditional probability table, which determines the realization of the random variable given its parents. == Markov blanket == In a Bayesian network, the Markov blanket of a node is the set of parents and children of that node, together with the children's parents. The values of the parents and children of a node evidently give information about that node. However, its children's parents also have to be included in the Markov blanket, because they can be used to explain away the node in question. In a Markov random field, the Markov blanket for a node is simply its adjacent (or neighboring) nodes. In a dependency network, the Markov blanket for a node is simply the set of its parents. == Dependency network versus Bayesian networks == Dependency networks have advantages and disadvantages with respect to Bayesian networks. In particular, they are easier to parameterize from data, as there are efficient algorithms for learning both the structure and probabilities of a dependency network from data. Such algorithms are not available for Bayesian networks, for which the problem of determining the optimal structure is NP-hard. Nonetheless, a dependency network may be more difficult to construct using a knowledge-based approach driven by expert-knowledge. == Dependency networks versus Markov networks == Consistent dependency networks and Markov networks have the same representational power. Nonetheless, it is possible to construct non-consistent dependency networks, i.e., dependency networks for which there is no compatible valid joint probability distribution. Markov networks, in contrast, are always consistent. == Definition == A consistent dependency network for a set of random variables X = ( X 1 , … , X n ) {\textstyle \mathbf {X} =(X_{1},\ldots ,X_{n})} with joint distribution p ( x ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x} )} is a pair ( G , P ) {\displaystyle (G,P)} where G {\displaystyle G} is a cyclic directed graph, where each of its nodes corresponds to a variable in X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } , and P {\displaystyle P} is a set of conditional probability distributions. The parents of node X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} , denoted P a i {\displaystyle \mathbf {Pa_{i}} } , correspond to those variables P a i ⊆ ( X 1 , … , X i − 1 , X i + 1 , … , X n ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {Pa_{i}} \subseteq (X_{1},\ldots ,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},\ldots ,X_{n})} that satisfy the following independence relationships p ( x i ∣ p a i ) = p ( x i ∣ x 1 , … , x i − 1 , x i + 1 , … , x n ) = p ( x i ∣ x − x i ) . {\displaystyle p(x_{i}\mid \mathbf {pa_{i}} )=p(x_{i}\mid x_{1},\ldots ,x_{i-1},x_{i+1},\ldots ,x_{n})=p(x_{i}\mid \mathbf {x} -{x_{i}}).} The dependency network is consistent in the sense that each local distribution can be obtained from the joint distribution p ( x ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x} )} . Dependency networks learned using large data sets with large sample sizes will almost always be consistent. A non-consistent network is a network for which there is no joint probability distribution compatible with the pair ( G , P ) {\displaystyle (G,P)} . In that case, there is no joint probability distribution that satisfies the independence relationships subsumed by that pair. == Structure and parameters learning == Two important tasks in a dependency network are to learn its structure and probabilities from data. Essentially, the learning algorithm consists of independently performing a probabilistic regression or classification for each variable in the domain. It comes from observation that the local distribution for variable X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} in a dependency network is the conditional distribution p ( x i | x − x i ) {\displaystyle p(x_{i}|\mathbf {x} -{x_{i}})} , which can be estimated by any number of classification or regression techniques, such as methods using a probabilistic decision tree, a neural network or a probabilistic support-vector machine. Hence, for each variable X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} in domain X {\displaystyle X} , we independently estimate its local distribution from data using a classification algorithm, even though it is a distinct method for each variable. Here, we will briefly show how probabilistic decision trees are used to estimate the local distributions. For each variable X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} in X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } , a probabilistic decision tree is learned where X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} is the target variable and X − X i {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} -X_{i}} are the input variables. To learn a decision tree structure for X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} , the search algorithm begins with a singleton root node without children. Then, each leaf node in the tree is replaced with a binary split on some variable X j {\displaystyle X_{j}} in X − X i {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} -X_{i}} , until no more replacements increase the score of the tree. == Probabilistic Inference == A probabilistic inference is the task in which we wish to answer probabilistic queries of the form p ( y ∣ z ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {y\mid z} )} , given a graphical model for X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } , where Y {\displaystyle \mathbf {Y} } (the 'target' variables) Z {\displaystyle \mathbf {Z} } (the 'input' variables) are disjoint subsets of X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } . One of the alternatives for performing probabilistic inference is using Gibbs sampling. A naive approach for this uses an ordered Gibbs sampler, an important difficulty of which is that if either p ( y ∣ z ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {y\mid z} )} or p ( z ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {z} )} is small, then many iterations are required for an accurate probability estimate. Another approach for estimating p ( y ∣ z ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {y\mid z} )} when p ( z ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {z} )} is small is to use modified ordered Gibbs sampler, where Z = z {\displaystyle \mathbf {Z=z} } is fixed during Gibbs sampling. It may also happen that y {\displaystyle \mathbf {y} } is rare, e.g. when Y {\displaystyle \mathbf {Y} } has many variables. So, the law of total probability along with the independencies encoded in a dependency network can be used to decompose the inference task into a set of inference tasks on single variables. This approach comes with the advantage that some terms may be obtained by direct lookup, thereby avoiding some Gibbs sampling. You can see below an algorithm that can be used for obtain p ( y | z ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {y|z} )} for a particular instance of y ∈ Y {\displaystyle \mathbf {y} \in \mathbf {Y} } and z ∈ Z {\displaystyle \mathbf {z} \in \mathbf {Z} } , where Y {\displaystyle \mathbf {Y} } and Z {\displaystyle \mathbf {Z} } are disjoint subsets. Algorithm 1: U := Y {\displaystyle \mathbf {U:=Y} } ( the unprocessed variables ) P := Z {\displaystyle \mathbf {P:=Z} } ( the processed and conditioning variables ) p := z {\displaystyle \mathbf {p:=z} } ( the values for P {\displaystyle \mathbf {P} } ) While U ≠ ∅ {\displaystyle \mathbf {U} \neq \emptyset } : Choose X i ∈ U {\displaystyle X_{i}\in \mathbf {U} } such that X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} has no more parents in U {\displaystyle U} than any variable in U {\displaystyle U} If all the parents of X {\displaystyle X} are in P {\displaystyle \mathbf {P} } p ( x i | p ) := p ( x i | p a i ) {\displaystyle p(x_{i}|\mathbf {p} ):=p(x_{i}|\mathbf {pa_{i}} )} Else Use a modified ordered Gibbs sampler to determine p ( x i | p ) {\displaystyle p(x_{i}|\mathbf {p} )} U := U − X i {\displaystyle \mathbf {U:=U} -X_{i}} P := P + X i {\displaystyle \mathbf {P:=P} +X_{i}} p := p + x i {\displaystyle \mathbf {p:=p} +x_{i}} Returns the product of the conditionals p ( x i | p ) {\displaystyle p(x_{i}|\mathbf {p} )} == Applications == In addition to the applications to probabilistic inference, the following applications are in the category of Collaborative Filtering (CF), which is the task of predicting preferences. Dependency networks are a natural model class on which to base CF predictions, once an algorithm for this task only needs estimation of p ( x i = 1 | x − x i = 0 ) {\displaystyle p(x_{i}=1|\mathbf {x} -{x_{i}}=0)} to produce recommendations. In particular, these estimates may be obtained by a direct lookup in a dependency network. Predicting what movies a person will like based on his or her ratings of movies seen; Predicting what web pages a person will access based on his or her history on the site; Predicting what news stories a person is interested in based on other stories he or she read; Predicting what product a person will buy based on products he or she has already purchased and/or dropped into his or her shopping basket. Another class of useful applications for dependency networks is related to data visualization, that is

Ballin' (Mustard and Roddy Ricch song)

"Ballin'" is a song by American record producer Mustard featuring American rapper Roddy Ricch. The track was released as the third single from Mustard's third studio album, Perfect Ten, on August 20, 2019, though it was available as early as the end of June 2019. The song and its accompanying video received acclaim from music critics, with Complex magazine naming it the Best Song of 2019. It peaked at number 11 on the Billboard Hot 100, marking Mustard's highest charting song in the US. The song received a nomination for Best Rap/Sung Performance at the 2020 Grammy Awards, making it the first time Ricch has been nominated for a Grammy and Mustard's first nomination as an artist. Later in 2019, the two released another collaboration, "High Fashion". == Background == Roddy Ricch revealed in an interview that the song was composed in late 2018, but Mustard wanted to keep it for his album, Perfect Ten, which he was still working on. The song was later included on the album, released in June 2019. Ricch said he knew the song was "hard enough" the first time he heard it, while Mustard proclaimed "this is going to be the one". == Composition and lyrics == "Ballin'" has a "rags to riches" theme. In its intro, the song samples girl group 702's 1997 top ten hit "Get It Together". The song features a "smooth, bouncy beat", with Roddy Ricch rapping about his come-up and ascent in the music industry. In the first verse, Ricch salutes fellow Los Angeles rapper, the late Nipsey Hussle and his girlfriend Lauren London: "I run these racks up with my queen like London and Nip". The line simultaneously references Ricch and Hussle's collaboration "Racks in the Middle", released earlier in 2019 as Hussle's last single before his death. Billboard's Heran Mamo noted that "in typical Hussle fashion", Roddy Ricch "narrates his life's hardships before delving into his newfound treasures". == Critical reception == The song was widely acclaimed by music critics. Charles Holmes of Rolling Stone magazine called it "a song of the year contender", while Complex and Billboard both named it as a "standout track" on the album. Pitchfork magazine included "Ballin'" in its list of The Best Rap Songs of 2019 and called it "the centerpiece of Mustard's underappreciated album Perfect Ten". Complex later named it the Best Song of 2019, calling it "a feel-good anthem so infectious you'll need antibiotics just to stop running it back". == Chart performance == "Ballin'" was at the time Mustard's highest charting song in the US, peaking at number 11 on the Billboard Hot 100. It was also Roddy Ricch's highest charting song, until he surpassed it a week later, with the release of his album track "The Box", which eventually reached number 1 on the chart. It reached number one on Billboard's Rhythmic Songs chart, becoming Mustard's second number one following "Pure Water" and Ricch's first number one. The song also topped the Rap Airplay chart. == Music video == The music video for the track was teased by Mustard on his Instagram page on September 29, 2019. The music video for the track was eventually released on October 2, 2019 to critical acclaim. The video features Mustard and Roddy Ricch driving a Lamborghini Aventador in Los Angeles, where they both are from, playing poker in a casino, and going to a strip club. This is contrasted with scenes in which Mustard and Roddy Ricch as children play cards with Monopoly money and playing with miniature toy Lamborghinis together, aspiring for wealth and luxury, representing how they went from "rags to riches". The video also pays tribute to rapper Nipsey Hussle, who had been killed a few months ago. == Live performances == On December 16, 2019, Roddy Ricch performed the song live, alongside an 8-piece orchestra, at Peppermint Club in Los Angeles for Audiomack's Trap Symphony series. Along with Mustard, he performed it at The Pop Out: Ken & Friends on June 19, 2024. == Other uses == The song can be heard on "Elyse's Skit", track 10 off Roddy Ricch's debut album Please Excuse Me for Being Antisocial. In the skit, which is an actual voicenote recording, the mother of a woman named Elyse sends her daughter a voicenote, with "Ballin'" playing in the background, while the mother proceeds to say "I can't get that damn song out my head", jokingly calling it "inappropriate music". Ricch called the skit "something natural". In 2023, AI covers of the song using models based on pop culture characters and real-world celebrities gained viral popularity. == Awards and nominations == 62nd Annual Grammy Awards == Charts == == Certifications ==

Signal transfer function

The signal transfer function (SiTF) is a measure of the signal output versus the signal input of a system such as an infrared system or sensor. There are many general applications of the SiTF. Specifically, in the field of image analysis, it gives a measure of the noise of an imaging system, and thus yields one assessment of its performance. == SiTF evaluation == In evaluating the SiTF curve, the signal input and signal output are measured differentially; meaning, the differential of the input signal and differential of the output signal are calculated and plotted against each other. An operator, using computer software, defines an arbitrary area, with a given set of data points, within the signal and background regions of the output image of the infrared sensor, i.e. of the unit under test (UUT), (see "Half Moon" image below). The average signal and background are calculated by averaging the data of each arbitrarily defined region. A second order polynomial curve is fitted to the data of each line. Then, the polynomial is subtracted from the average signal and background data to yield the new signal and background. The difference of the new signal and background data is taken to yield the net signal. Finally, the net signal is plotted versus the signal input. The signal input of the UUT is within its own spectral response. (e.g. color-correlated temperature, pixel intensity, etc.). The slope of the linear portion of this curve is then found using the method of least squares. == SiTF curve == The net signal is calculated from the average signal and background, as in signal to noise ratio (imaging)#Calculations. The SiTF curve is then given by the signal output data, (net signal data), plotted against the signal input data (see graph of SiTF to the right). All the data points in the linear region of the SiTF curve can be used in the method of least squares to find a linear approximation. Given n {\displaystyle n\,} data points ( x i , y i ) {\displaystyle (x_{i}\,,y_{i}\,)} a best fit line parameterized as y = m x + b {\displaystyle y=mx+b\,} is given by: m = ∑ x i y i n − ∑ x i n ∑ y i n ∑ x i 2 n − ( ∑ x i n ) 2 b = ∑ y i n − m ∑ x i n {\displaystyle m={\frac {{\frac {\sum x_{i}y_{i}}{n}}-{\frac {\sum x_{i}}{n}}{\frac {\sum y_{i}}{n}}}{{\frac {\sum x_{i}^{2}}{n}}-({\frac {\sum x_{i}}{n}})^{2}}}\qquad \qquad b={\frac {\sum y_{i}}{n}}-m{\frac {\sum x_{i}}{n}}}

Leiden algorithm

The Leiden algorithm is a community detection algorithm developed by Traag et al at Leiden University. It was developed as a modification of the Louvain method. Like the Louvain method, the Leiden algorithm attempts to optimize modularity in extracting communities from networks; however, it addresses key issues present in the Louvain method, namely poorly connected communities and the resolution limit of modularity. == Improvement over Louvain method == Broadly, the Leiden algorithm uses the same two primary phases as the Louvain algorithm: a local node moving step (though, the method by which nodes are considered in Leiden is more efficient) and a graph aggregation step. However, to address the issues with poorly-connected communities and the merging of smaller communities into larger communities (the resolution limit of modularity), the Leiden algorithm employs an intermediate refinement phase in which communities may be split to guarantee that all communities are well-connected. Consider, for example, the following graph: Three communities are present in this graph (each color represents a community). Additionally, the center "bridge" node (represented with an extra circle) is a member of the community represented by blue nodes. Now consider the result of a node-moving step which merges the communities denoted by red and green nodes into a single community (as the two communities are highly connected): Notably, the center "bridge" node is now a member of the larger red community after node moving occurs (due to the greedy nature of the local node moving algorithm). In the Louvain method, such a merging would be followed immediately by the graph aggregation phase. However, this causes a disconnection between two different sections of the community represented by blue nodes. In the Leiden algorithm, the graph is instead refined: The Leiden algorithm's refinement step ensures that the center "bridge" node is kept in the blue community to ensure that it remains intact and connected, despite the potential improvement in modularity from adding the center "bridge" node to the red community. == Graph components == Before defining the Leiden algorithm, it will be helpful to define some of the components of a graph. === Vertices and edges === A graph is composed of vertices (nodes) and edges. Each edge is connected to two vertices, and each vertex may be connected to zero or more edges. Edges are typically represented by straight lines, while nodes are represented by circles or points. In set notation, let V {\displaystyle V} be the set of vertices, and E {\displaystyle E} be the set of edges: V := { v 1 , v 2 , … , v n } E := { e i j , e i k , … , e k l } {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}V&:=\{v_{1},v_{2},\dots ,v_{n}\}\\E&:=\{e_{ij},e_{ik},\dots ,e_{kl}\}\end{aligned}}} where e i j {\displaystyle e_{ij}} is the directed edge from vertex v i {\displaystyle v_{i}} to vertex v j {\displaystyle v_{j}} . We can also write this as an ordered pair: e i j := ( v i , v j ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}e_{ij}&:=(v_{i},v_{j})\end{aligned}}} === Community === A community is a unique set of nodes: C i ⊆ V C i ⋂ C j = ∅ ∀ i ≠ j {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}C_{i}&\subseteq V\\C_{i}&\bigcap C_{j}=\emptyset ~\forall ~i\neq j\end{aligned}}} and the union of all communities must be the total set of vertices: V = ⋃ i = 1 C i {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}V&=\bigcup _{i=1}C_{i}\end{aligned}}} === Partition === A partition is the set of all communities: P = { C 1 , C 2 , … , C n } {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\mathcal {P}}&=\{C_{1},C_{2},\dots ,C_{n}\}\end{aligned}}} == Partition quality == How communities are partitioned is an integral part on the Leiden algorithm. How partitions are decided can depend on how their quality is measured. Additionally, many of these metrics contain parameters of their own that can change the outcome of their communities. === Modularity === Modularity is a highly used quality metric for assessing how well a set of communities partition a graph. The equation for this metric is defined for an adjacency matrix, A, as: Q = 1 2 m ∑ i j ( A i j − k i k j 2 m ) δ ( c i , c j ) {\displaystyle Q={\frac {1}{2m}}\sum _{ij}(A_{ij}-{\frac {k_{i}k_{j}}{2m}})\delta (c_{i},c_{j})} where: A i j {\displaystyle A_{ij}} represents the edge weight between nodes i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} ; see Adjacency matrix; k i {\displaystyle k_{i}} and k j {\displaystyle k_{j}} are the sum of the weights of the edges attached to nodes i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} , respectively; m {\displaystyle m} is the sum of all of the edge weights in the graph; c i {\displaystyle c_{i}} and c j {\displaystyle c_{j}} are the communities to which the nodes i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} belong; and δ {\displaystyle \delta } is Kronecker delta function: δ ( c i , c j ) = { 1 if c i and c j are the same community 0 otherwise {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\delta (c_{i},c_{j})&={\begin{cases}1&{\text{if }}c_{i}{\text{ and }}c_{j}{\text{ are the same community}}\\0&{\text{otherwise}}\end{cases}}\end{aligned}}} === Reichardt Bornholdt Potts Model (RB) === One of the most well used metrics for the Leiden algorithm is the Reichardt Bornholdt Potts Model (RB). This model is used by default in most mainstream Leiden algorithm libraries under the name RBConfigurationVertexPartition. This model introduces a resolution parameter γ {\displaystyle \gamma } and is highly similar to the equation for modularity. This model is defined by the following quality function for an adjacency matrix, A, as: Q = ∑ i j ( A i j − γ k i k j 2 m ) δ ( c i , c j ) {\displaystyle Q=\sum _{ij}(A_{ij}-\gamma {\frac {k_{i}k_{j}}{2m}})\delta (c_{i},c_{j})} where: γ {\displaystyle \gamma } represents a linear resolution parameter === Constant Potts Model (CPM) === Another metric similar to RB is the Constant Potts Model (CPM). This metric also relies on a resolution parameter γ {\displaystyle \gamma } The quality function is defined as: H = − ∑ i j ( A i j w i j − γ ) δ ( c i , c j ) {\displaystyle H=-\sum _{ij}(A_{ij}w_{ij}-\gamma )\delta (c_{i},c_{j})} === Understanding Potts Model resolution parameters/Resolution limit === Typically Potts models such as RB or CPM include a resolution parameter in their calculation. Potts models are introduced as a response to the resolution limit problem that is present in modularity maximization based community detection. The resolution limit problem is that, for some graphs, maximizing modularity may cause substructures of a graph to merge and become a single community and thus smaller structures are lost. These resolution parameters allow modularity adjacent methods to be modified to suit the requirements of the user applying the Leiden algorithm to account for small substructures at a certain granularity. The figure on the right illustrates why resolution can be a helpful parameter when using modularity based quality metrics. In the first graph, modularity only captures the large scale structures of the graph; however, in the second example, a more granular quality metric could potentially detect all substructures in a graph. == Algorithm == The Leiden algorithm starts with a graph of disorganized nodes (a) and sorts it by partitioning them to maximize modularity (the difference in quality between the generated partition and a hypothetical randomized partition of communities). The method it uses is similar to the Louvain algorithm, except that after moving each node it also considers that node's neighbors that are not already in the community it was placed in. This process results in our first partition (b), also referred to as P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} . Then the algorithm refines this partition by first placing each node into its own individual community and then moving them from one community to another to maximize modularity. It does this iteratively until each node has been visited and moved, and each community has been refined - this creates partition (c), which is the initial partition of P refined {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}_{\text{refined}}} . Then an aggregate network (d) is created by turning each community into a node. P refined {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}_{\text{refined}}} is used as the basis for the aggregate network while P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} is used to create its initial partition. Because we use the original partition P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} in this step, we must retain it so that it can be used in future iterations. These steps together form the first iteration of the algorithm. In subsequent iterations, the nodes of the aggregate network (which each represent a community) are once again placed into their own individual communities and then sorted according to modularity to form a new P refined {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}_{\text{refined}}} , forming (e) in the above graphic. In the case depicted by the graph, the nodes were already sorted optimally, so no change too