You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
There has been a lot of interest in developing algorithms to extract clusters or communities from networks. This work proposes a method, based on blockmodelling, for leveraging communities and other topological features for use in a predictive classification task. Motivated by the issues faced by the field of community detection and inspired by recent advances in Bayesian topic modelling, the presented model automatically discovers topological features relevant to a given classification task. In this way, rather than attempting to identify some universal best set of clusters for an undefined goal, the aim is to find the best set of clusters for a particular purpose. Using this method, topological features can be validated and assessed within a given context by their predictive performance. The proposed model differs from other relational and semi-supervised learning models as it identifies topological features to explain the classification decision. In a demonstration on a number of real networks the predictive capability of the topological features are shown to rival the performance of content based relational learners. Additionally, the model is shown to outperform graph-based semi-supervised methods on directed and approximately bipartite networks.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: Community structure is one of the most important features of real networks and reveals the internal organization of the nodes. Many algorithms have been proposed but the crucial issue of testing, i.e., the question of how good an algorithm is, with respect to others, is still open. Standard tests include the analysis of simple artificial graphs with a built-in community structure, that the algorithm has to recover. However, the special graphs adopted in actual tests have a structure that does not reflect the real properties of nodes and communities found in real networks. Here we introduce a class of benchmark graphs, that account for the heterogeneity in the distributions of node degrees and of community sizes. We use this benchmark to test two popular methods of community detection, modularity optimization, and Potts model clustering. The results show that the benchmark poses a much more severe test to algorithms than standard benchmarks, revealing limits that may not be apparent at a first analysis.

[2]: Uncovering the community structure exhibited by real networks is a crucial step toward an understanding of complex systems that goes beyond the local organization of their constituents. Many algorithms have been proposed so far, but none of them has been subjected to strict tests to evaluate their performance. Most of the sporadic tests performed so far involved small networks with known community structure and or artificial graphs with a simplified structure, which is very uncommon in real systems. Here we test several methods against a recently introduced class of benchmark graphs, with heterogeneous distributions of degree and community size. The methods are also tested against the benchmark by Girvan and Newman [Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 7821 (2002)] and on random graphs. As a result of our analysis, three recent algorithms introduced by Rosvall and Bergstrom [Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 7327 (2007); Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105, 1118 (2008)], [J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. (2008), P10008], and Ronhovde and Nussinov [Phys. Rev. E 80, 016109 (2009)] have an excellent performance, with the additional advantage of low computational complexity, which enables one to analyze large systems.

[3]: This paper considers the problem of algorithm selection for community detection. The aim of community detection is to identify sets of nodes in a network which are more interconnected relative to their connectivity to the rest of the network. A large number of algorithms have been developed to tackle this problem, but as with any machine learning task there is no "one-size-fits-all" and each algorithm excels in a specific part of the problem space. This paper examines the performance of algorithms developed for weighted networks against those using unweighted networks for different parts of the problem space (parameterised by the intra inter community links). It is then demonstrated how the choice of algorithm (weighted unweighted) can be made based only on the observed network.
In part, due to the lack of formal problem definition, community detection lacks a commonly accepted evaluation procedure. To address this [1] proposes a benchmark graph generator and in later work [2] goes on to give a comparative analysis of a selection of community detection algorithms. Recognising that different community detection algorithms produce desirable outputs under different circumstances, the work in [3] considered the problem of selecting an appropriate community detection algorithm based on the properties of the network and community structure. These methods however rely on there being a single partition, which in many cases is unreasonable. The work presented here instead considers that there may be alternative partitions and instead searches for the partition relevant to a particular context.