Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

The communities (red), (blue) form the strategy profile s = (1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2).

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

The communities (red), (blue) form the strategy profile q = (1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Distance to Nash equilibrium for the Cournot oligopoly and different p values.

The null hypothesis that there is no statistical difference between means of results could not be rejected by using a Wilcoxon sum-rank test (0.05 significance level).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Evolution of the distance to NE in all cases: again no significant diference between the four p values is observed.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Duration of the runs (in sec.).

The null hypothesis that differences between mean values are not significant was rejected by using a Wilcoxon sum-rank test with a significance level of 0.05.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

GN zout = 6, 7, 8; boxplots of NMI values for all methods considered (left).

On the right, the black-white matrix represents Wilcoxon h values for each pair of methods considered, numbered in the order they appear in the boxplot. A black square indicates a statistical difference between results. For zout = 8 results obtained with all values of p are significantly better than all other methods considered.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

LFR small, 1000 nodes; boxplots of NMI values for all methods considered (left).

On the right, the black-white matrix represents Wilcoxon h values for each pair of methods considered, numbered in the order they appear in the boxplot. A black square indicates a statistical difference between results.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Evolution of the mean NMI values over time for the GN zout = 8 set and different p values.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Real-world networks; boxplots of NMI values for all methods considered (left).

On the right, the black-white matrix represents Wilcoxon h values for each pair of methods considered, numbered in the order they appear in the boxplot. A black square indicates a statistical difference between results.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Table 1.

Fraction of nodes that can improve their payoffs by unilateral deviation in solutions reported by pMNEO for networks with known community structure.

A zero value indicates that reported solutions are indeed Nash equilibria of game . We report average values ± standard deviations and confidence limits of the mean.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Fraction of nodes that can improve their payoffs by unilateral deviation in solutions reported by pMNEO for real world networks with unknown community structure.

A zero value indicates that reported solutions are indeed Nash equilibria of game . We report average values ± standard deviations and confidence limits of the mean also for modularity Q.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 10.

Political books dataset: The ‘real’ community structure is represented.

We can see yellow nodes that have more colored links than yellow, indicating more links in the other two communities.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

Political books dataset: A solution reported by pMNEO with NMI = 0.52 and verified to be a Nash equilibrium; some of the ‘difficult’ nodes are placed in a different community.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

Differences in running times for the four tested p values as percentage of the running time for the p = 100% case for each network set.

More »

Fig 12 Expand

Fig 13.

Number of payoff function calls in Alg. 2, 10 individuals.

Notches indicate confidence limits of the mean.

More »

Fig 13 Expand

Table 3.

Wilcoxon sum-rank results regarding differences in payoff function calls for the tested p values. An * indicates significant difference.

More »

Table 3 Expand