↓ Skip to main content

A new computational method to split large biochemical networks into coherent subnets

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Systems Biology, February 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
citeulike
6 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A new computational method to split large biochemical networks into coherent subnets
Published in
BMC Systems Biology, February 2011
DOI 10.1186/1752-0509-5-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wynand S Verwoerd

Abstract

Compared to more general networks, biochemical networks have some special features: while generally sparse, there are a small number of highly connected metabolite nodes; and metabolite nodes can also be divided into two classes: internal nodes with associated mass balance constraints and external ones without. Based on these features, reclassifying selected internal nodes (separators) to external ones can be used to divide a large complex metabolic network into simpler subnetworks. Selection of separators based on node connectivity is commonly used but affords little detailed control and tends to produce excessive fragmentation.The method proposed here (Netsplitter) allows the user to control separator selection. It combines local connection degree partitioning with global connectivity derived from random walks on the network, to produce a more even distribution of subnetwork sizes. Partitioning is performed progressively and the interactive visual matrix presentation used allows the user considerable control over the process, while incorporating special strategies to maintain the network integrity and minimise the information loss due to partitioning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
France 2 3%
United States 2 3%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 2 3%
Netherlands 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Unknown 57 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 23%
Student > Master 9 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 6 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 38%
Computer Science 10 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Engineering 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 8 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 December 2012.
All research outputs
#18,321,703
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#834
of 1,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,568
of 183,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#32
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,142 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 183,499 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.