# A Comparative Analysis of Community Detection Algorithms on Artificial Networks

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00763 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.00763/

## Key facts

- Cited by 23 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 2 Aug 2016.

## Built on by (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [Human-inspired Episodic Memory for Infinite Context LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.09450/) (2024)
- [A Comprehensive Review of Community Detection in Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.11798/) (2023)
- [Normalized mutual information is a biased measure for classification and community detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.01282/) (2023)
- [Pairwise Adjusted Mutual Information](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.12641/) (2021)
- [Graph-based Incident Aggregation for Large-Scale Online Service Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.12179/) (2021)
- [A Differentiable Approach to Combinatorial Optimization using Dataless Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.08209/) (2022)
- [Modeling Regime Shifts in Multiple Time Series](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.09692/) (2021)
- [Mutual information and the encoding of contingency tables](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.05393/) (2024)
- [Modularity maximisation for graphons](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.00503/) (2021)
- [Survey of Generative Methods for Social Media Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.07041/) (2021)
- [Consistency between ordering and clustering methods for graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.12933/) (2022)
- [HiPart: Hierarchical Divisive Clustering Toolbox](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.08680/) (2022)
- [Synwalk -- Community Detection via Random Walk Modelling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.08623/) (2021)
- [An Experimental Study of Dimension Reduction Methods on Machine Learning Algorithms with Applications to Psychometrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.13230/) (2022)
- [Learning dynamic representations of the functional connectome in neurobiological networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14102/) (2024)
- [The ParClusterers Benchmark Suite (PCBS): A Fine-Grained Analysis of Scalable Graph Clustering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.10290/) (2024)
- [A Spectral Framework for Tracking Communities in Evolving Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.07378/) (2024)
- [GARG-AML against Smurfing: A Scalable and Interpretable Graph-Based Framework for Anti-Money Laundering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.04292/) (2025)
- [Persistent Homology of Topic Networks for the Prediction of Reader Curiosity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.11095/) (2025)
- [QUINTA: Reflexive Sensibility For Responsible AI Research and Data-Driven Processes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.16347/) (2025)
- [Community Concealment from Graph Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.12250/) (2026)
- [TextClusterLab: An Integrated Framework for Reliable Text Clustering Studies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.28328/) (2026)
- [Geometry vs Structure: Graph-Based Diagnostics for LiDAR Point-Cloud Simulation Fidelity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.16378/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Many community detection algorithms have been developed to uncover the mesoscopic properties of complex networks. However how good an algorithm is, in terms of accuracy and computing time, remains still open. Testing algorithms on real-world network has certain restrictions which made their insights potentially biased: the networks are usually small, and the underlying communities are not defined objectively. In this study, we employ the Lancichinetti-Fortunato-Radicchi benchmark graph to test eight state-of-the-art algorithms. We quantify the accuracy using complementary measures and algorithms' computing time. Based on simple network properties and the aforementioned results, we provide guidelines that help to choose the most adequate community detection algorithm for a given network. Moreover, these rules allow uncovering limitations in the use of specific algorithms given macroscopic network properties. Our contribution is threefold: firstly, we provide actual techniques to determine which is the most suited algorithm in most circumstances based on observable properties of the network under consideration. Secondly, we use the mixing parameter as an easily measurable indicator of finding the ranges of reliability of the different algorithms. Finally, we study the dependency with network size focusing on both the algorithm's predicting power and the effective computing time.