Table 6

Network reconstruction from combinations of topological and spatial node measures.

Community1

Community2


Measurements

<a onClick="popup('http://www.biomedcentral.com/1752-0509/1/16/mathml/M1','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1752-0509/1/16/mathml/M1">View MathML</a>

<a onClick="popup('http://www.biomedcentral.com/1752-0509/1/16/mathml/M1','MathML',630,470);return false;" target="_blank" href="http://www.biomedcentral.com/1752-0509/1/16/mathml/M1">View MathML</a>

2

0.563

0.577

4

    0.810

0.664

5

0.727

0.612

7

0.498

0.584

2, 4

0.710

0.750

2, 5

0.590

0.650

2, 7

0.495

0.634

4, 5

0.790

0.685

4, 7

0.753

0.727

5, 7

0.654

0.643

2, 4, 5

0.753

0.721

2, 4, 7

0.688

    0.775

2, 5, 7

0.595

0.673

4, 5, 7

0.753

0.708


Geometrical averages of connectivity estimation obtained for the two cortical communities while considering the 14 combinations of measurements listed in the first column. The best combinations for communities 1 and 2 were respectively the local density (5) and the pair of measurements including the local density (5) and cortical area (7). The configurations leading to the best matches have been emphasized.

Costa et al. BMC Systems Biology 2007 1:16   doi:10.1186/1752-0509-1-16

Open Data