skip to main content
10.1145/3341161.3342866acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Perturb and combine to identify influential spreaders in real-world networks

Published:15 January 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Some of the most effective influential spreader detection algorithms are unstable to small perturbations of the network structure. Inspired by bagging in Machine Learning, we propose the first Perturb and Combine (P&C) procedure for networks. It (1) creates many perturbed versions of a given graph, (2) applies a node scoring function separately to each graph, and (3) combines the results. Experiments conducted on real-world networks of various sizes with the k-core, generalized k-core, and PageRank algorithms reveal that P&C brings substantial improvements. Moreover, this performance boost can be obtained at almost no extra cost through parallelization. Finally, a bias-variance analysis suggests that P&C works mainly by reducing bias, and that therefore, it should be capable of improving the performance of all vertex scoring functions, including stable ones. An extended version of this paper is provided by [1].

References

  1. A. J.-P. Tixier, M.-E. G. Rossi, F. D. Malliaros, J. Read, and M. Vazirgiannis, "Perturb and combine to identify influential spreaders in real-world networks," arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.09586, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. F. Hoppensteadt, Mathematical Theories of Populations: Demographics, Genetics, and Epidemics. Siam, 1975, vol. 20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. J. Leskovec, L. A. Adamic, and B. A. Huberman, "The dynamics of viral marketing," ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB), vol. 1, no. 1, p. 5, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Pei, L. Muchnik, J. S. Andrade Jr, Z. Zheng, and H. A. Makse, "Searching for superspreaders of information in real-world social media," Scientific reports, vol. 4, p. 5547, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. K. Balog, L. Azzopardi, and M. De Rijke, "Formal models for expert finding in enterprise corpora," in Proceedings of the 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. ACM, 2006, pp. 43--50.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. A. Tixier, F. Malliaros, and M. Vazirgiannis, "A graph degeneracy-based approach to keyword extraction," in Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2016, pp. 1860--1870.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. M. Kitsak, L. K. Gallos, S. Havlin, F. Liljeros, L. Muchnik, H. E. Stanley, and H. A. Makse, "Identification of influential spreaders in complex networks," Nature physics, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 888--893, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. G. F. De Arruda, A. L. Barbieri, P. M. Rodríguez, F. A. Rodrigues, Y. Moreno, and L. da Fontoura Costa, "Role of centrality for the identification of influential spreaders in complex networks," Physical Review E, vol. 90, no. 3, p. 032812, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. F. D. Malliaros, M.-E. G. Rossi, and M. Vazirgiannis, "Locating influential nodes in complex networks," Scientific reports, vol. 6, p. 19307, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. F. Malliaros, C. Giatsidis, A. Papadopoulos, and M. Vazirgiannis, "The core decomposition of networks: Theory, algorithms and applications," 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. S. B. Seidman, "Network structure and minimum degree," Social networks, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 269--287, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. V. Batagelj and M. Zaveršnik, "Generalized cores," arXiv preprint cs/0202039, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. A. Adiga and A. K. S. Vullikanti, "How robust is the core of a network?" in Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Springer, 2013, pp. 541--556.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. A. V. Goltsev, S. N. Dorogovtsev, and J. F. F. Mendes, "k-core (bootstrap) percolation on complex networks: Critical phenomena and nonlocal effects," Physical Review E, vol. 73, no. 5, p. 056101, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. L. Breiman, "Bias, variance, and arcing classifiers," 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. L. Breiman, "Bagging predictors," Machine learning, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 123--140, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. L. Breiman, "Random forests," Machine learning, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 5--32, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. P. Erdös and A. Rényi, "On the evolution of random graphs," Publ. Math. Inst. Hung. Acad. Sci, vol. 5, pp. 17--61, 1960.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. F. Chung and L. Lu, "The average distances in random graphs with given expected degrees," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 99, no. 25, pp. 15 879--15 882, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. I. C. Ipsen and R. S. Wills, "Mathematical properties and analysis of googleâĂŹs pagerank."Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. A. Y. Ng, A. X. Zheng, and M. I. Jordan, "Link analysis, eigenvectors and stability," in International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 17, no. 1. LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES LTD, 2001, pp. 903--910.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. L. Page, S. Brin, R. Motwani, and T. Winograd, "The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web." Stanford InfoLab, Tech. Rep., 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. J. Leskovec and A. Krevl, "SNAP Datasets: Stanford large network dataset collection," http://snap.stanford.edu/data, Jun. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. B. Klimt and Y. Yang, "The enron corpus: A new dataset for email classification research," ECML '04: Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 217--226, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. W. O. Kermack and A. G. McKendrick, "Contributions to the mathematical theory of epidemics. ii. the problem of endemicity," vol. 138, no. 834. JSTOR, 1932, pp. 55--83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. D. Chakrabarti, Y. Wang, C. Wang, J. Leskovec, and C. Faloutsos, "Epidemic thresholds in real networks," ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC), vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 1:1--1:26, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. R. Mihalcea and P. Tarau, "TextRank: bringing order into texts," in Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). Association for Computational Linguistics, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. A. Tixier, K. Skianis, and M. Vazirgiannis, "Gowvis: a web application for graph-of-words-based text visualization and summarization," Proceedings of ACL-2016 System Demonstrations, pp. 151--156, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. A. Hulth, "Improved automatic keyword extraction given more linguistic knowledge," in Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). Association for Computational Linguistics, 2003, pp. 216--223.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. F. Rousseau and M. Vazirgiannis, "Main core retention on graph-of-words for single-document keyword extraction," in European Conference on Information Retrieval. Springer, 2015, pp. 382--393.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. K. Järvelin and J. Kekäläinen, "Cumulated gain-based evaluation of ir techniques," ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 422--446, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Y. Grandvalet, "Bagging equalizes influence," Machine Learning, vol. 55, pp. 251--270, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Y. Raviv and N. Intrator, "Bootstrapping with noise: An effective regularization technique," Connection Science, vol. 8, no. 3-4, pp. 355--372, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. B. W. Silverman, Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. Routledge, 1986.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. D. Zügner, A. Akbarnejad, and S. Günnemann, "Adversarial attacks on neural networks for graph data," arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.07984, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. G. Ghoshal and A.-L. Barabási, "Ranking stability and super-stable nodes in complex networks," Nature communications, vol. 2, p. 394, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton, "Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks," in Advances in neural information processing systems, 2012, pp. 1097--1105.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. T. Mikolov, K. Chen, G. Corrado, and J. Dean, "Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space," arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ASONAM '19: Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining
    August 2019
    1228 pages
    ISBN:9781450368681
    DOI:10.1145/3341161

    Copyright © 2019 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 15 January 2020

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Acceptance Rates

    ASONAM '19 Paper Acceptance Rate41of286submissions,14%Overall Acceptance Rate116of549submissions,21%

    Upcoming Conference

    KDD '24

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader