Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byStephan Dow Modified over 3 years ago

1
RTM: Laws and a Recursive Generator for Weighted Time-Evolving Graphs Leman Akoglu, Mary McGlohon, Christos Faloutsos Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science 1

2
Motivation Graphs are popular! Social, communication, network traffic, call graphs… 2 …and interesting surprising common properties for static and un-weighted graphs How about weighted graphs? …and their dynamic properties? How can we model such graphs? for simulation studies, what-if scenarios, future prediction, sampling

3
Outline 1. Motivation 2. Related Work - Patterns - Generators - Burstiness 3. Datasets 4. Laws and Observations 5. Proposed graph generator: RTM 6. (Sketch of proofs) 7. Experiments 8. Conclusion 3

4
Graph Patterns (I) Small diameter - 19 for the web [Albert and Barabási, 1999] - 5-6 for the Internet AS topology graph [Faloutsos, Faloutsos, Faloutsos, 1999] Shrinking diameter [Leskovec et al.05] Power Laws 4 y(x) = Axγ, A>0, γ>0 Blog Network time diameter

5
Graph Patterns (II) 5 DBLP Keyword-to-Conference NetworkInter-domain Internet graph Densification [Leskovec et al.05] and Weight [McGlohon et al.08] Power-laws Eigenvalues Power Law [Faloutsos et al.99] Rank Eigenvalue |E| |W| |srcN| |dstN| Degree Power Law [Richardson and Domingos, 01] In-degree Count Epinions who-trusts-whom graph

6
Graph Generators Erdős-Rényi (ER) model [Erdős, Rényi 60] Small-world model [Watts, Strogatz 98] Preferential Attachment [Barabási, Albert 99] Edge Copying models [Kumar et al.99], [Kleinberg et al.99], Forest Fire model [Leskovec, Faloutsos 05] Kronecker graphs [Leskovec, Chakrabarti, Kleinberg, Faloutsos 07] Optimization-based models [Carlson,Doyle,00] [Fabrikant et al. 02] 6

7
Edge and weight additions are bursty, and self- similar. Entropy plots [Wang+02] is a measure of burstiness. Burstiness Time Weights Resolution Entropy Resolution Entropy Bursty: 0.2 < slope < 0.9 slope = 5.9

8
Outline 1. Motivation 2. Related Work - Patterns - Generators 3. Datasets 4. Laws and Observations 5. Proposed graph generator: RTM 6. Sketch of proofs 7. Experiments 8. Conclusion 8

9
Datasets 9 Bipartite networks: |N| |E| time 1. AuthorConference 17K, 22K, 25 yr. 2. KeywordConference 10K, 23K, 25 yr. 3. AuthorKeyword 27K, 189K, 25 yr. 4. CampaignOrg 23K, 877K, 28 yr. 1

10
10 Bipartite networks: |N| |E| time 1. AuthorConference 17K, 22K, 25 yr. 2. KeywordConference 10K, 23K, 25 yr. 3. AuthorKeyword 27K, 189K, 25 yr. 4. CampaignOrg 23K, 877K, 28 yr. 3 Datasets

11
11 Bipartite networks: |N| |E| time 1. AuthorConference 17K, 22K, 25 yr. 2. KeywordConference 10K, 23K, 25 yr. 3. AuthorKeyword 27K, 189K, 25 yr. 4. CampaignOrg 23K, 877K, 28 yr. Unipartite networks: |N| |E| time 5. BlogNet 60K, 125K, 80 days 6. NetworkTraffic 21K, 2M, 52 months 3 Datasets 20MB

12
12 Bipartite networks: |N| |E| time 1. AuthorConference 17K, 22K, 25 yr. 2. KeywordConference 10K, 23K, 25 yr. 3. AuthorKeyword 27K, 189K, 25 yr. 4. CampaignOrg 23K, 877K, 28 yr. Unipartite networks: |N| |E| time 5. BlogNet 60K, 125K, 80 days 6. NetworkTraffic 21K, 2M, 52 months 3 Datasets 20MB 5MB 25MB

13
Outline 1. Motivation 2. Related Work - Patterns - Generators 3. Datasets 4. Laws and Observations 5. Proposed graph generator: RTM 6. Sketch of proofs 7. Experiments 8. Conclusion 13

14
Observation 1: λ 1 Power Law(LPL) Q1: How does the principal eigenvalue λ 1 of the adjacency matrix change over time? Q2: Why should we care? 14

15
Observation 1: λ 1 Power Law(LPL) Q1: How does the principal eigenvalue λ 1 of the adjacency matrix change over time? Q2: Why should we care? A2: λ 1 is closely linked to density and maximum degree, also relates to epidemic threshold. A1: 15 λ 1 (t) E(t) α, α 0.5

16
λ 1 Power Law (LPL) cont. Theorem: For a connected, undirected graph G with N nodes and E edges, without self-loops and multiple edges; λ 1 (G) {2 (1 – 1/N) E} 1/2 For large N, 1/N 0 and λ 1 (G) cE 1/2 16 DBLP Author-Conference network

17
Observation 2:λ 1,w Power Law (LWPL) Q: How does the weighted principal eigenvalue λ 1,w change over time? A: 17 λ 1,w (t) E(t) β DBLP Author-Conference networkNetwork Traffic

18
Observation 3: Edge Weights PL(EWPL) Q: How does the weight of an edge relate to popularity if its adjacent nodes? 18 FEC Committee-to- Candidate network w i,j w i * w j Wi,j WiWj j i A:

19
Outline 1. Motivation 2. Related Work - Patterns - Generators 3. Datasets 4. Laws and Observations 5. Proposed graph generator: RTM 6. Sketch of proofs 7. Experiments 8. Conclusion 19

20
Problem Definition Generate a sequence of realistic weighted graphs that will obey all the patterns over time. SUGP: static un-weighted graph properties small diameter power law degree distribution SWGP: static weighted graph properties the edge weight power law (EWPL) the snapshot power law (SPL) 20

21
Problem Definition DUGP: dynamic un-weighted graph properties the densification power law (DPL) shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 Power Law (LPL) DWGP: dynamic weighted graph properties the weight power law (WPL) bursty weight additions λ 1,w Power Law (LWPL) 21

22
2D solution: Kronecker Product 22 Idea : Recursion Intuition : Communities within communities Self-similarity Power-laws

23
2D solution: Kronecker Product 23

24
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 24 4 2 3 I X I 1,1,1

25
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 25 4 2 3 I X I 1,2,1

26
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 26 4 2 3 I X I 1,3,1

27
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 27 4 2 3 I X I 1,4,1

28
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 28 4 2 3 I X I 2,1,1

29
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 29 4 2 3 I X I 3,1,1

30
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 30 4 2 3 I

31
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 31 4 2 3 I X I 1,1,2

32
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 32 4 2 3 I X I 1,2,2

33
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 33 4 2 3 I 4242 3232 2

34
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 34 senders recipients t-slices time

35
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 35 t1t1 t2t2 t3t3

36
3D solution: Recursive Tensor Multiplication(RTM) 36 t1t1 t2t2 t3t3 31 2 5 2 1 2 3 4 1 234 1 234 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 234 23 1 2 3 4 1 23 4 1 1 2 4 5 2 3 2 1 23 4 2

37
Outline 1. Motivation 2. Related Work - Patterns - Generators 3. Datasets 4. Laws and Observations 5. Proposed graph generator: RTM 6. (Sketch of proofs) 7. Experiments 8. Conclusion 37

38
Experimental Results 38 SUGP: small diameter PL Degree Distribution SWGP: Edge Weights PL Snaphot PL DUGP: Densification PL shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 PL DWGP: Weight PL bursty weight additions λ 1,w PL Time diameter

39
Experimental Results 39 SUGP: small diameter PL Degree Distribution SWGP: Edge Weights PL Snaphot PL DUGP: Densification PL shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 PL DWGP: Weight PL bursty weight additions λ 1,w PL degree count

40
Experimental Results 40 SUGP: small diameter PL Degree Distribution SWGP: Edge Weights PL Snaphot PL DUGP: Densification PL shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 PL DWGP: Weight PL bursty weight additions λ 1,w PL |N| |E|

41
Experimental Results 41 SUGP: small diameter PL Degree Distribution SWGP: Edge Weights PL Snaphot PL DUGP: Densification PL shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 PL DWGP: Weight PL bursty weight additions λ 1,w PL |E| |W|

42
Experimental Results 42 SUGP: small diameter PL Degree Distribution SWGP: Edge Weights PL Snaphot PL DUGP: Densification PL shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 PL DWGP: Weight PL bursty weight additions λ 1,w PL

43
Experimental Results 43 In-degree In-weight SUGP: small diameter PL Degree Distribution SWGP: Edge Weights PL Snaphot PL DUGP: Densification PL shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 PL DWGP: Weight PL bursty weight additions λ 1,w PL Out-degree Out-weight

44
Experimental Results 44 SUGP: small diameter PL Degree Distribution SWGP: Edge Weights PL Snaphot PL DUGP: Densification PL shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 PL DWGP: Weight PL bursty weight additions λ 1,w PL

45
Experimental Results 45 SUGP: small diameter PL Degree Distribution SWGP: Edge Weights PL Snaphot PL DUGP: Densification PL shrinking diameter bursty edge additions λ 1 PL DWGP: Weight PL bursty weight additions λ 1,w PL |E| λ1 |E| λ1,w

46
Conclusion In real graphs, (un)weighted largest eigenvalues are power-law related to number of edges. Weight of an edge is related to the total weights and of its incident nodes. Recursive Tensor Multiplication is a recursive method to generate (1)weighted, (2)time- evolving, (3)self-similar, (4)power-law networks. Future directions: Probabilistic version of RTM Fitting the initial tensor I 46 Wi,j Wi Wj

47
47 Contact us Mary McGlohon www.cs.cmu.edu/~mmcgloho mmcgloho@cs.cmu.edu Christos Faloutsos www.cs.cmu.edu/~christos christos@cs.cmu.edu Leman Akoglu www.andrew.cmu.edu/~lakoglu lakoglu@cs.cmu.edu

Similar presentations

Presentation is loading. Please wait....

OK

Essential Cell Biology

Essential Cell Biology

© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google

Ppt on social networking website project Ppt on palm island in dubai Ppt on brand management process Ppt on disk formatting in windows Production in the short run ppt on tv Ppt on magnets and electromagnets Ppt on bank management system in c++ Ppt on submerged arc welding Ppt on textile industry in india Ppt on wireless solar mobile charger