Background In a recent work I transformed a complex and integrated text like the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature into a network of interconnected parts of text. This new approach allowed understanding that a continuous body of text cannot accurately reflect the true structure of the Code, and provided a scientific methodology to identify a priori parts that could be affected by future revisions. In this next step, I investigate further the structure of the Code, seeking to use the network in order to identify the various conceptual communities grouping the various articles and other text items of the Code. Methods Using the first version of the network of the Code, I perform a comprehensive modularity analysis in two rounds: the first round aims to identify the fewest and largest communities or modules for the entire network, whereas the second round identifies the sub-modules within each larger module. The potential conflicts between the current structure of the Code and the module composition are evaluated with a parcellation analysis. Results The optimal modularity search identified 10 different modules in the entire network of varying size (ranging from 75 to 200 nodes). Each module can be further divided into smaller modules, that all-together allow describing the 65 conceptual groups of text items in the Code. Parcellation analysis revealed that two-thirds of the current chapters of the Code are in excellent or good accordance with the recovered conceptual modules, whereas the current composition of six chapters is in serious conflict with the conceptual structure of the Code. Discussion Judging only the composition and not the order of appearance of the Articles in the Chapters of the Code, I show that in many cases the current structure of the Code is found to correspond quite well to the concepts presented therein. The most important conflict is found on the provisions related to the various groups of names governed by the Code: family-, genus-, and species-group names. Currently, these provisions are spread out in different Articles in different Chapters, along the entire length of the Code. The modularity analysis suggests that re-organizing the Code in chapters that will deal with all aspects related to a given group (e.g., chapters including information on name formation, availability, typification, and validity for a given group), could potentially improve reader experience and, consequently, the applicability of the Code.

中文翻译：

---

模块化分析有助于改进国际动物命名法的结构

背景 在最近的一项工作中，我将一个复杂而综合的文本（如国际动物命名法典）转化为一个相互连接的文本部分网络。这种新方法使人们能够理解连续的文本主体无法准确反映准则的真实结构，并提供了一种科学的方法来识别可能受未来修订影响的先验部分。在下一步中，我将进一步调查守则的结构，寻求使用网络来识别各种概念社区，将守则的各种文章和其他文本项分组。方法使用代码的第一版网络，我分两轮进行了全面的模块化分析：第一轮旨在确定整个网络的最少和最大的社区或模块，而第二轮识别每个较大模块中的子模块。代码的当前结构和模块组成之间的潜在冲突通过分区分析进行评估。结果 最优模块化搜索在整个网络中识别出 10 个不同大小的模块（范围从 75 到 200 个节点）。每个模块可以进一步划分为更小的模块，这些模块共同允许描述代码中文本项的 65 个概念组。分块分析显示，目前《守则》三分之二的章节与恢复的概念模块非常吻合或良好，而目前六章的组成与《守则》的概念结构存在严重冲突。讨论 仅判断守则各章中条款的组成而非出现顺序，我表明，在许多情况下，守则的当前结构与其中提出的概念非常吻合。最重要的冲突出现在与《守则》管辖的各种名称组相关的规定上：科、属和种组名称。目前，这些规定分布在不同章节的不同条款中，贯穿《守则》的整个长度。模块化分析表明，在将处理与给定组相关的所有方面的章节中重新组织代码（例如，章节包括关于给定组的名称形成、可用性、类型化和有效性的信息），可能会改善读者体验因此，