Fix multiplex example#1265
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Fixes the supra-adjacency docs mismatch reported in #1262 and addresses the underlying multiplex generator behavior that made the documented expectation unreliable.
This PR does two things:
Problem
The docs example in Section 3.8 expected:
but used random_multilayer_ER(...), which generates a general multilayer network where each base node is assigned to a single layer. In that case, the supra-adjacency size reflects
the number of node-layer pairs that actually exist, which is typically n, not n * l.
Separately, random_multiplex_ER(...) did not explicitly add isolated replicas, so even in multiplex mode the supra-adjacency shape was not guaranteed to be exactly n * l when some
nodes had no incident edges in a layer.
Root cause
Changes
Code
Docs
Tests
Expected behavior after this PR
Validation
Direct sanity checks confirm:
Closes
Closes #1262