Advertisement

Pattern Analysis and Applications

, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp 243–254 | Cite as

Matching graphs with unique node labels

  • Peter J. Dickinson
  • Horst BunkeEmail author
  • Arek Dadej
  • Miro Kraetzl
Theoretical Advances

Abstract

A special class of graphs is introduced in this paper. The graphs belonging to this class are characterised by the existence of unique node labels. A number of matching algorithms for graphs with unique node labels are developed. It is shown that problems such as graph isomorphism, subgraph isomorphism, maximum common subgraph (MCS) and graph edit distance (GED) have a computational complexity that is only quadratic in the number of nodes. Moreover, computing the median of a set of graphs is only linear in the cardinality of the set. In a series of experiments, it is demonstrated that the proposed algorithms run very fast in practice. The considered class makes the matching of large graphs, consisting of thousands of nodes, computationally tractable. We also discuss an application of the considered class of graphs and related matching algorithms to the classification and detection of abnormal events in computer networks.

Keywords

Graph matching Graph isomorphism Maximum common subgraph Graph edit distance Median graph Unique node label 

References

  1. 1.
    (2001) Special section on graph algorithms and computer vision. IEEE Trans PAMI 23(10)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    (2003) Special issue on graph-based representations in pattern recognition. Pattern Recognit Lett 24(8)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    (2004) Special issue on graph matching in pattern recognition and machine vision. Int J Pattern Recognit Artif Intell 18(3)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McKay B (1981) Practical graph isomorphism. Congressus Numerantium 30:45–87Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ullman JR (1976) An algorithm for subgraph isomorphism. J ACM 23(1):31–42Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Levi G (1972) A note on the derivation of maximal common subgraphs of two directed or undirected graphs. Calcolo 9:341–354Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McGregor J (1982) Backtrack search algorithms and the maximal common subgraph problem. Software Pract Experience 12(1):23–34Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Messmer BT, Bunke H (1998) A new algorithm for error-tolerant subgraph isomorphism detection. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Machine Intell 20:493–504Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sanfeliu A, Fu KS (1983) A distance measure between attributed relational graphs for pattern recognition. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 13(3):353–362Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cordella LP, Foggia P, Sansone C, Vento M (2001) An improved algorithm for matching large graphs. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IAPR-TC15 workshop on graph based representations in pattern recognition, Naples, Italy, May 2001, pp 149–159Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Larrosa J, Valiente G (2002) Constraint satisfaction algorithms for graph pattern matching. Math Struct Comput Sci 12:403–422Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Christmas WJ, Kittler J, Petrou M (1995) Structural matching in computer vision using probabilistic relaxation. IEEE Trans PAMI 8:749–764Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wilson RC, Hancock E (1997) Structural matching by discrete relaxation. IEEE Trans PAMI 19:634–648Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cross A, Wilson R, Hancock E (1997) Inexact graph matching with genetic search. Pattern Recognit 30:953–970Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang I, Fan K-C, Horng J-T (1997) Genetic-based search for error-correcting graph isomorphism. IEEE Trans SMC 27:588–597Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luo B, Hancock E (2001) Structural graph matching using the EM algorithm and singular value decomposition. IEEE Trans PAMI 23:1120–1136Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kosinov S, Caelli T (2002) Inexact multisubgraph matching using graph eigenspace and clustering models. In: Caelli T, Amin A, Duin R, Kamel M, de Ridder D (eds) Structural, syntactic, and statistical pattern recognition, LNCS 2396. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 133–142Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Luo B, Wilson R, Hancock E (2002) Spectral feature vectors for graph clustering. In: Caelli T, Amin A, Duin R, Kamel M, de Ridder D (eds) Structural, syntactic, and statistical pattern recognition, LNCS 2396. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 83–93Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pelillo M, Jagota A (1995) Feasible and infeasible maxima in a quadratic program for maximum clique. J Art Neural Netw 2(4):411–420Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hopcroft JE, Wong JK (1974) Linear time algorithm for isomorphism of planar graphs. In: Proceedings of the 6th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing, Seattle, Washington, April/May 1974, pp 172–184 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jiang X, Bunke H (1996) Including geometry in graph representations: a quadratic-time graph isomorphism algorithm and its application. In: Perner P, Wang P, Rosenfeld A (eds) Advances in structural and syntactic pattern recognition, LNCS 1121. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 110–119Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Luks EM (1982) Isomorphism of graphs of bounded valence can be tested in polynomial time. J Comput Syst Sci 25:42–65Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pelillo M (2002) Matching free trees, maximal cliques, and monotone game dynamics. IEEE Trans PAMI 24(11):1535–1541Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shokonfandeh A, Dickinson S (2001) A unified framework for indexing and matching hierarchical shape structures. In: Arcelli C, Cordella L, Sanniti di Baja G (eds) Visual form 2001, LNCS 2059. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 67–84Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schenker A, Last M, Bunke H, Kandel A (2003) Clustering of web documents using a graph model. In: A Antonacopoulos, H Jianying (eds) Web document analysis: challenges and opportunities. World Scientific, River Edge, New Jersey Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schenker A, Last M, Bunke H, Kandel A (2003) Classification of web documents using a graph model. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on document analysis and recognition, Edinburgh, Scotland, August 2003, pp 472–476Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schenker A, Last M, Bunke H, Kandel A (2004) Classification of web documents using graph matching. Pattern Recognit Artif Intell 18(3):475–496Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dickinson P, Bunke H, Dadej A, Kraetzl M (2003) On graphs with unique node labels. In: Hancock E, Vento M (eds) Proceedings of the 4th IAPR international workshop on graph based representations in pattern recognition (GbRPR 2003), York, UK, June/July 2003. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 13–23Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jiang X, Munger A, Bunke H (2001) On median graphs: properties, algorithms, and applications. PAMI 23(10):1144–1151Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bunke H (1999) Error correcting graph matching: on the influence of the underlying cost function. IEEE Trans PAMI 21:917–922Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Huberman BA, Lukose RM (1997) Social dilemmas and internet congestion. Science 277(5325):535–537Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Snow AP, Weiss MBH (1997) Empirical evidence of reliability growth in large-scale networks. Netw Syst Manag 5(2):197–213Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dickinson P, Bunke H, Dadej A, Kraetzl M (2001) Application of median graphs in detection of anomalous change in communication networks. In: Proceedings of the 5th world multiconference on systemics, cybernetics and informatics (SCI 2001) vol 5, Orlando, Florida, July 2001Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shoubridge PJ, Kraetzl M, Wallis WD, Bunke H (2002) Detection of abnormal change in a time series of graphs. J Interconnection Netw 3:85–101Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bunke H, Kraetzl M, Shoubridge PJ, Wallis WD (2002) Measuring change in large enterprise data networks. In: Proceedings of the conference on information, decision and control (IDC 2002), Adelaide, South Australia, February 2002, pp 53–58Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chung FRK, Lu L (2002) Connected components in random graphs with given expected degree sequences. Ann Comb (6):125–145Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tangmunarunkit H, Govindan R, Jamin S, Shenker S, Willinger W (2002) Network topology generators: degree-based vs structural. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2002 conference on applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communication, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, August 2002Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter J. Dickinson
    • 1
  • Horst Bunke
    • 2
    Email author
  • Arek Dadej
    • 3
  • Miro Kraetzl
    • 1
  1. 1.ISR DivisionDSTOEdinburghAustralia
  2. 2.Institut für Informatik und angewandte MathematikUniversität BernBernSwitzerland
  3. 3.ITRUniversity of South AustraliaMawson LakesAustralia

Personalised recommendations