Fig. 3
From: Diversity of meso-scale architecture in human and non-human connectomes
Modularity maximization and the weighted stochastic blockmodel uncover fundamentally different architectural signatures. a Variation of information within and across community detection techniques (Qmax and WSBM) demonstrating greater dissimilarity of partitions between techniques than within techniques. b Community assortativity, \({\cal A}\), as a function of community size, N, demonstrating that Qmax communities, on average, are more assortative (the inset shows the mean community assortativity curves as a function of distance). Note: asterisks indicate that both t tests were statistically significant. c Comparison of statistic derived using functional data analysis (yellow line) with that expected in a null distribution. Specifically, we generated a statistic by performing a pointwise subtraction and summation of the curves \(\bar {\cal A}(N)\) obtained for the WSBM and Qmax. The value of this statistic quantifies the difference between mean community assortativity across communities of all sizes and is negative when communities detected using Qmax are more assortative than WSBMs. We compared this statistic against a null distribution obtained from a null model wherein we preserved the number and size of communities in a given partition but permute nodes’ assignments uniformly and randomly (1000 repetitions). d Changes in regional assortativity, Δa i , when considering WSBM versus Qmax partitions, ordered by greatest to least decrease. Note that the majority of regions decrease assortativity in the partitions estimated from WSBM compared to those estimated from Qmax (i.e., Δϕ i  < 0). e Correlation of regional assortativity while varying the number of communities from K = 2,…,10. Note the high consistency for K ≥ 4. f Regional assortativity scores grouped by cognitive systems: DAN, dorsal attention; CONT, cognitive control; DMN, default mode; VIS, visual; LIM, limbic; SMN, somatomotor; SAL, salience; SUB, subcortical. The limits of each box represent the interquartile range (25th and 75th percentiles). g Regional assortativity (corrected for degree through standardization procedure) as a function of node degree, k i
