At 2017-03-28 07:18:52, "Tiago de Paula Peixoto" <tiago@skewed.de> wrote:
>On 28.03.2017 00:02, treinz wrote:
>> I think I'm confused by how the input and output are related to each other
>> in the layered model. Let's say each network in my data is 1 of the top 3
>> layers of Fig. 1 of the paper you mentioned. I don't have a well-defined
>> sequence variable for the networks except that I know they're related to
>> each other but not exactly the same. You can think of them as realizations
>> of different perturbed states of the same underlying network but each comes
>> with some experimental noise. I'm expecting the algorithm to tell me how
>> many of these perturbed states are there in my data and what's the SBM for
>> each of these states. I'm thinking maybe the layered SBM can help me with
>> that. But it seems that in order to use the layered model, I have to first
>> collapse all the networks, which I think will lose a lot of information in
>> my data and I don't know how to interpret the output.
>
>I don't really understand what you want, exactly, and what you mean by
>"perturbed states". Forget about the layered SBM for a moment, and try to
>explain clearly and succinctly how your data is, and what you want to obtain
>in the end.
>
>Best,
>Tiago
>
>-- 
>Tiago de Paula Peixoto <tiago@skewed.de>
>