Network Analysis
Valerie Cardenas NicolsonAssistant Adjunct Professor
Department of Radiology and p gyBiomedical Imaging
March 2, 2010
What is a network?
• Complex weblike structures– Cell is network of chemicals connected byCell is network of chemicals connected by
chemical reactions– Internet is network of routers and
computers linked by physical or wireless links
– Social network, nodes are humans and edges are social relationships
March 2, 2010
Jefferson High Schoolsexual relationships over 18 monthssexual relationships over 18 months
63 isolated pairs 21 triads63 isolated pairs, 21 triadsVery large structure involving 52% of students with 37 steps between most distant nodes
Graph theory
• Study of complex networks• Initially focused on regular graphsInitially focused on regular graphs
– Connections are completely regular, i.e. each node is connected only to nearesteach node is connected only to nearest neighbors
March 2, 2010
Random Graphs
• Since 1950s large-scale networks with no
Random Graphs
Since 1950s large scale networks with no apparent design principles were described as random graphs
• N nodes• Connect every pair of nodes with probability p
( 1)2
pN NE −≈
y p p y p• Approximately K edges randomly distributed
with:
( 1)2
pN NK −≈ Example:
March 2, 2010
2 p=0.25, N=8K=7
But…
• Are real networks (such as the brain) fundamentally random?y
• Intuitively, complex systems must display some organizing principlesdisplay some organizing principles, which must be encoded in their topology– arrangement in which the nodes of the– arrangement in which the nodes of the
network are connected to each other
March 2, 2010
How do we explore brainHow do we explore brain networks using graph theory?
• Define the network nodes• Estimate a continuous measure of association between
dnodes• Generate an association matrix, apply threshold to create
adjacency matrixadjacency matrix• Calculate network parameters • Compare network parameters to equivalent parameters of a
population of random networks
March 2, 2010
1. Define network nodes
• EEG electrodes• MEG electrodesMEG electrodes• Anatomically defined regions
C ti l ll ti (MRI DTI DSI)– Cortical parcellation (MRI, DTI, DSI)– Individual fMRI voxels
March 2, 2010
2. Estimate a continuous measure of association
between nodesbetween nodes• Spectral coherence between MEG sensors
Correlations in cortical thickness or MRI• Correlations in cortical thickness or MRI volume between regions (nodes)
• Connection probability between two regions• Connection probability between two regions of DTI data set
• Correlation between voxel-wise fMRI time• Correlation between voxel-wise fMRI time series
• Tract tracingTract tracingMarch 2, 2010
3. Generate association and3. Generate association and adjacency matrices
• Matrices of nodes vs. nodes• Association matrix
– Value at each (x,y) is measure of association between nodes x and y
• Adjacency matrix– Association matrix is thresholded
I di t h th d d ( ti ) i t– Indicates whether and edge (connection) exists between each pair of nodes
– Symmetrical for undirected graphsSymmetrical for undirected graphs
March 2, 2010
Association and Adjacency
104 ROIs or nodes104 ROIs or nodes
March 2, 2010K
4. Calculate network measures
• Node degree degree distributionNode degree, degree distribution, assortativity
• Clustering coefficient• Clustering coefficient• Path length and efficiency• Connection density or cost• Hubs, centrality and robustness, y• Modularity
March 2, 2010Bullmore and Sporns, 2009
Node degree and Assortativity
• ki– number of edges connected to a node i– degree of node I
• Assortativity• Assortativity– Correlation between the degrees of
connected nodes– Positive assortativity indicates that high-
degree nodes tend to connect to each other
March 2, 2010
Degree Distribution• Degree distribution of a graph
– Probability distribution of ki– In random graph, exponential P(k) ∼ e-αk
– WWW, power law P(k) ∼ k-α
• Existence of few major hubs (google yahoo)Existence of few major hubs (google, yahoo)– Transportation, truncated power P(k) ∼ k−α e-k/kc
• Probability of highly connected hubs greater than in a random graph but smaller than in network such as WWWgraph but smaller than in network such as WWW
0 8
1
1.2
0 2
0.4
0.6
0.8
random
power law
truncated power
March 2, 20100
0.2
1 8 15 22 29 36 43 50 57 64 71 78 85 92 99 106
113
120
127
134
141
148
155
162
169
176
183
190
197
Clustering• There are “cliques” or “clusters” where every
node is connected to every other nodenode is connected to every other node• Random networks have low avg. clustering;
complex networks have high clusteringp g gLet node i have ki edges which connect it to ki other nodes. Ki is number of edges existing between ki nodes.
CkkKCii
ii −=
hhfi hblifi hbhif1)1(
2
CCC
ii
i
=
=
∑othereach ofneighborsnearest alsoareiofneighborsnearest theif 1
March 2, 2010
pCrand = graph, random aFor
Path Length• Li,j := minimal number of edges that must be
traversed to form a direct connection between two nodes i and j
• Random and complex networks have short mean path lengths (high global efficiency)path lengths (high global efficiency)
• Efficiency is inversely related to path length
11,2 L
NL
i jji== ∑∑
edges ofnumber is where,)1l (
ln~ KKNLrand
March 2, 2010
)1ln(NK
−
Examples
Path length
ClusteringC=0.13
Clustering
D
C=1
Degree
March 2, 2010
Cost• Connection density or cost is the actual number of y
edges in the graph as a proportion of the total number of possible edgesE ti t f h i l t ( ) f t k• Estimator of physical cost (e.g., energy) of a network
E 10 <=<EEKmaxE
March 2, 2010
Centrality• Centrality measures how many of the shortest paths between all
other node pairs in the network pass through it. Nodes with high centrality are crucial to efficient communication.
• Eigenvector centrality of the ith node is the ith component of the eigenvector of the adjacency matrix A associated with the largest eigenvalue
1
i
Lic
jji
Cl
)(
centrality Closeness 1)(,
=∑
σ
mj
iic
mj
imj mj
mjB
andregionsbetween pathsshortest ofnumber :
centrality sBetweennes )(
)(,
,
=
= ∑≠≠
σ
σσ
March 2, 2010imji
mj
mj
mj
through pass that and between pathsshortest ofnumber :)(
deg o sbe weep ss o esou be:
,
,
=σ
σ
Centrality ExampleCentrality Example
Highest closeness centrality
Highest betweennesscentralitycentrality
Highest closeness centrality
March 2, 2010
Hubs and Robustness• Hubs are nodes with high degree or high centralityg g g y• Robustness refers either to the
• structural integrity of the network following deletions of nodes or edges
• Effects of perturbations on local or global network statesstates
March 2, 2010
Modularity• Many complex networks consist of a number of y p
modules. Each module contains several densely interconnected nodes, and there are relatively few connections between nodes in different modulesconnections between nodes in different modules.
• Algorithms to assess modularity:• Girvan and Newman, Community structure inGirvan and Newman, Community structure in
social and biological networks, Proc. NatlAcad. Sci. USA 99, 7821-7826 (2002).
March 2, 2010
5. Compare to equivalent parameters from population of random networks
• Lack of statistical theory concerning distribution of networkLack of statistical theory concerning distribution of network metric
• How to determine if network parameters are not random?• Must build a null distribution of equivalent parameters• Must build a null distribution of equivalent parameters• Estimate in random networks with same number of nodes
and connectionsPermutation testing• Permutation testing
• Comparing network parameters from 2 populations (e.g., normal and schizophrenic)• Permutation testing• Compute difference in params for true labeling• Permute labels and compute param difference, build dist
March 2, 2010
Small Worlds
• Despite large size, in most networks there is a relatively short path between any two y p ynodes
• Example: Six degrees of separationExample: Six degrees of separation– Stanley Milgram (1967)
Path of acquaintances with typical length about– Path of acquaintances with typical length about six between most pairs of people in the US
March 2, 2010
Small World ExampleSmall World Example
Path=4 Path=3 Path=1p is probability that pair of nodes is rewired
From Guye et al Curr Opin Neurol 21:393 403March 2, 2010
From Guye, et al., Curr Opin Neurol 21:393-403.
Why should we think about the brain as a small world network?
• Brain is a complex network on multiple spatial andBrain is a complex network on multiple spatial and time scales– Connectivity of neurons
• Brain supports segregated and distributed• Brain supports segregated and distributed information processing– Somatosensory and visual systems segregated
Di t ib t d i ti f ti– Distributed processing, executive functions• Brain likely evolved to maximize efficiency and
minimize the costs of information processing– Small world topology is associated with high global and local
efficiency of parallel information processing, sparse connectivity between nodes, and low wiring costsAd ti fi ti
March 2, 2010
– Adaptive reconfiguration
Small world metrics
network, worldsmall aFor
1>>=γrand
LC
C
1≈=
γ
λrandL
L
1>= λγσ
March 2, 2010
Path Length and ClusteringC(0) and L(0)
l t iare clustering coefficient and path plength for regular graph.
For small world, C( )/C(0) 1C(p)/C(0) < 1L(p)/L(0) < 1
March 2, 2010 Watts and Strogatz, Nature, Vol 393:440-442
Empirical Examples ofEmpirical Examples of Small World Networks
Watts and Strogatz, Nature, Vol 393:440-442g
March 2, 2010
March 2, 2010
How to use networkHow to use network analysis to study brain?
• Test for small world behavior• Model development or evolution of brain networks• Link network topology to network dynamics (structure
to function)• Explore network robustness (vulnerability to• Explore network robustness (vulnerability to
damaged nodes, model for neurodegeneration)• Determine if network parameters can help diagnose
or distinguish patients from controls• Relate network parameters to cognition
March 2, 2010
Schizophrenia vs. ControlsBassett et al, J. Neurosci. 2008
• 203 patients with schizophrenia and related spectrum di ddisorders
• 259 healthy volunteers• T1 weighted imaging at 1 5T• T1-weighted imaging at 1.5T• Estimated gray matter volume in 104 ROIs
– Transmodal, unimodal, and multimodal
• Computed partial correlation between gray matter volumes for each possible pair; each group separateE l d t k t t f• Explored network parameters at a range of thresholds where small world properties were observed
March 2, 2010
Normal cortical network organization
• Small world properties and hubs found– Right premotor, orbitofrontal, middle temporal,
retrosplenial, dorsolateral prefrontal, and insula• Multimodal network hierarchical: hubs had
hi h d b t l l t i t dhigh degree but low clustering; connected predominantly to nodes not otherwise connected to each otherconnected to each other
• Transmodal network had high assortativity; hubs connected to hubshubs connected to hubs
March 2, 2010
SchizophreniaSmall orld properties different h bs• Small world properties, different hubs– Insula, thalamus, temporal pole, inferior frontal,
inferior temporal, and precentral cortexinferior temporal, and precentral cortex• Multimodal less hierarchicial• Greater multimodal connection distanceGreater multimodal connection distance• No differences in transmodal or unimodal• 23 nodes showed clustering differences;• 23 nodes showed clustering differences;
predominantly left hemisphere with increased clustering in schizophreniag p
March 2, 2010
Multimodal network diff i hi h idifferences in schizophrenia
R d S CRed, S>CBlack, C>S
March 2, 2010
Network efficiency and IQyvan den Heuvel et al., J. Neurosci. 2009
• 19 healthy subject• IQ measured with WAIS-III• Resting state fMRI• Association was correlation between time-series from
each voxel pair (9500 voxels/nodes)each voxel pair (9500 voxels/nodes)• Network constructed for each subject• Network measures were correlated with IQ scoresQ
– γ, λ and total connections k– Also correlated normalized path length at each node with IQ
March 2, 2010
Functional networkFunctional network• Small world properties observed for aSmall world properties observed for a
range of thresholds
March 2, 2010
Network params vs. IQ
• No association between γ and IQγ• At higher thresholds (T=0.45, T=0.5)
– Negative association between IQ and λNegative association between IQ and λ– Longer path length, lower IQ
Nodes vs. IQ
• Path length at nodes vs. IQPath length at nodes vs. IQ– Medial frontal gyrus, precuneus/posterior
cingulate, bilateral inferior parietal, left g , p ,superior temporal, left inferior gyrus
March 2, 2010
Conclusions
• Efficiency of intrinsic resting-state functional connectivity patterns is y ppredictive of cognitive performance
• Short path length is crucial for efficientShort path length is crucial for efficient information processing in functional brain networksbrain networks
March 2, 2010
Complications
• Weighted graphs• Directional graphsDirectional graphs
March 2, 2010