Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery

, Volume 30, Issue 5, pp 1395–1425 | Cite as

Optimizing network robustness by edge rewiring: a general framework

  • Hau Chan
  • Leman AkogluEmail author


Spectral measures have long been used to quantify the robustness of real-world graphs. For example, spectral radius (or the principal eigenvalue) is related to the effective spreading rates of dynamic processes (e.g., rumor, disease, information propagation) on graphs. Algebraic connectivity (or the Fiedler value), which is a lower bound on the node and edge connectivity of a graph, captures the “partitionability” of a graph into disjoint components. In this work we address the problem of modifying a given graph’s structure under a given budget so as to maximally improve its robustness, as quantified by spectral measures. We focus on modifications based on degree-preserving edge rewiring, such that the expected load (e.g., airport flight capacity) or physical/hardware requirement (e.g., count of ISP router traffic switches) of nodes remain unchanged. Different from a vast literature of measure-independent heuristic approaches, we propose an algorithm, called EdgeRewire, which optimizes a specific measure of interest directly. Notably, EdgeRewire is general to accommodate six different spectral measures. Experiments on real-world datasets from three different domains (Internet AS-level, P2P, and airport flights graphs) show the effectiveness of our approach, where EdgeRewire produces graphs with both (i) higher robustness, and (ii) higher attack-tolerance over several state-of-the-art methods.


Graph robustness Edge rewiring Robustnesss measures  Graph spectrum Optimization algorithms Attack tolerance 



The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their useful comments. This material is based upon work supported by the ARO Young Investigator Program under Contract No. W911NF-14-1-0029, NSF CAREER 1452425, IIS 1408287 and IIP1069147, a Facebook Faculty Gift, an R&D grant from Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems, and Stony Brook University Office of Vice President for Research. Any conclusions expressed in this material are of the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the views, either expressed or implied, of the funding parties.


  1. Akoglu L, McGlohon M, Faloutsos C (2010) Oddball: spotting anomalies in weighted graphs. In: Proceedings of the 14th Pacific-Asia conference on advances in knowledge discovery and data mining—volume Part II, PAKDD’10, pp 410–421Google Scholar
  2. Albert R, Jeong H, Barabasi A-L (2000) Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature 406(6794):378–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baras J, Hovareshti P (2009) Efficient and robust communication topologies for distributed decision making in networked systems. In: Proceedings of the 48th IEEE conference on decision and control, held jointly with the 2009 28th Chinese control conference, CDC/CCC’09, pp 3751–3756Google Scholar
  4. Beygelzimer A, Grinstein G, Linsker R, Rish I (2005) Improving network robustness by edge modification. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 357(3–4):593–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brouwer AE, Haemers WH (2012) Spectra of graphs. Springer, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Buekenhout F, Parker M (1998) The number of nets of the regular convex polytopes in dimension \(\le \)4. Discret Math 186(1–3):69–94Google Scholar
  7. Chakrabarti D, Wang Y, Wang C, Leskovec J, Faloutsos C (2008) Epidemic thresholds in real networks. ACM Trans Inf Syst Secur 10(4):1:1–1:26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chan H, Akoglu L, Tong H (2014) Make it or break it: manipulating robustness in large networks. In: Proceedings of the 2014 SIAM international conference on data mining, SDM’14, pp 325–333Google Scholar
  9. Chan H, Han S, Akoglu L (2015) Where graph topology matters: the robust subgraph problem. In: Proceedings of the 2015 SIAM international conference on data mining, SDM’15, pp 10–18Google Scholar
  10. Chandra AK, Raghavan P, Ruzzo WL, Smolensky R (1989) The electrical resistance of a graph captures its commute and cover times. In: Proceedings of the twenty-first annual ACM symposium on theory of computing, STOC ’89, pp 574–586Google Scholar
  11. Cvetković DM, Doob M, Sachs H (1980) Spectra of graphs: theory and application. Academic Press, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Costa L da F, Rodrigues F A, Travieso G, Boas P R V (2007) Characterization of complex networks: a survey of measurements. Adv Phys 56:167–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ellens W, Kooij RE (2013) Graph measures and network robustness. CoRR 1–13. arxiv:1311.5064
  14. Ellens W, Spieksma F, Van Mieghem P, Jamakovic A, Kooij R (2011) Effective graph resistance. Linear Algebra Appl 435(10):2491–2506MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Estrada E (2006) Network robustness to targeted attacks. The interplay of expansibility and degree distribution. Phys J B Complex Syst 52(4):563–574zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Estrada E, Hatano N, Benzi M (2012) The physics of communicability in complex networks. Phys Rep 514(3):89–119MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Faloutsos M, Faloutsos P, Faloutsos C (1999) On power-law relationships of the internet topology. SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 29(4):251–262CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Fiedler M (1973) Algebraic connectivity of graphs. Czechoslov Math J 23:298–305MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Ghosh A, Boyd S, Saberi A (2008) Minimizing effective resistance of a graph. SIAM Rev 50(1):37–66MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Holme P, Kim BJ, Yoon CN, Han SK (2002) Attack vulnerability of complex networks. Phys Rev E 65(5):056109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jamakovic A, Van Mieghem P (2008) On the robustness of complex networks by using the algebraic connectivity. In: Proceedings of the 7th international IFIP-TC6 networking conference on AdHoc and sensor networks, wireless networks, next generation internet, NETWORKING’08, pp 183–194Google Scholar
  22. Klein DJ, Randić M (1993) Resistance distance. Math Chem 12(1):81–95MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Latora V, Marchiori M (2007) A measure of centrality based on the network efficiency. New J Phys 9:188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Le LT, Eliassi-Rad T, Tong H (2015) Met: a fast algorithm for minimizing propagation in large graphs with small eigen-gaps. In: Proceedings of the 2015 SIAM international conference on data mining, SDM’15, pp 694–702Google Scholar
  25. Louzada VHP, Daolio F, Herrmann HJ, Tomassini M (2013) Smart rewiring for network robustness. J Complex Netw 1:150–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Malliaros FD, Megalooikonomou V, Faloutsos C (2012) Fast robustness estimation in large social graphs: communities and anomaly detection. In: Proceedings of the 2012 SIAM international conference on data mining, SDM’12, pp 942–953Google Scholar
  27. Matisziw TC, Murray AT (2009) Modeling s-t path availability to support disaster vulnerability assessment of network infrastructure. Comput Oper Res 36(1):16–26CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Mosk-Aoyama D (2008) Maximum algebraic connectivity augmentation is np-hard. Oper Res Lett 36(6):677–679MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Newman MEJ (2003) Mixing patterns in networks. Phys Rev E 67:026126MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Saha S, Adiga A, Prakash BA, Vullikanti AKS (2015) Approximation algorithms for reducing the spectral radius to control epidemic spread. In: Proceedings of the 2015 SIAM international conference on data mining, SDM’15, pp 568–576Google Scholar
  31. Scellato S, Leontiadis I, Mascolo C, Basu P, Zafer M (2013) Evaluating temporal robustness of mobile networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 12(1):105–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schneider CM, Moreira AA, Andrade JS, Havlin S, Herrmann HJ (2011) Mitigation of malicious attacks on networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108(10):3838–3841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stewart GW, Sun J-G (1990) Matrix perturbation theory. Academic Press, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Sun F, Shayman MA (2007) On pairwise connectivity of wireless multihop networks. Int J Netw Secur 2(1/2):37–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sydney A, Scoglio C, Gruenbacher D (2013) Optimizing algebraic connectivity by edge rewiring. Appl Math Comput 219(10):5465–5479MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Tong H, Prakash BA, Eliassi-Rad T, Faloutsos M, Faloutsos C (2012) Gelling, and melting, large graphs by edge manipulation. In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM international conference on information and knowledge management, CIKM ’12, pp 245–254Google Scholar
  37. Tong H, Prakash BA, Tsourakakis C, Eliassi-Rad T, Faloutsos C, Chau DH (2010) On the vulnerability of large graphs. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE international conference on data mining, ICDM ’10, pp 1091–1096Google Scholar
  38. Tsourakakis CE (2008) Fast counting of triangles in large real networks without counting: algorithms and laws. In: Proceedings of the 2008 eighth IEEE international conference on data mining, ICDM ’08, pp 608–617Google Scholar
  39. Van Mieghem P, Stevanović D, Kuipers F, Li C, van de Bovenkamp R, Liu D, Wang H (2011) Decreasing the spectral radius of a graph by link removals. Phys Rev E 84:016101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Van Mieghem P, Wang H, Ge X, Tang S, Kuipers FA (2010) Influence of assortativity and degree-preserving rewiring on the spectra of networks. Eur Phys J B 76(4):643–652CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. Wang H, Van Mieghem P (2008) Algebraic connectivity optimization via link addition. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on bio-inspired models of network, information and computing systems, BIONETICS ’08, pp 22:1–22:8Google Scholar
  42. Wu J, Mauricio B, Tan Y-J, Deng H-Z (2010) Natural connectivity of complex networks. Chin Phys Lett 27(7):078902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zeng A, Liu W (2012) Enhancing network robustness against malicious attacks. Phys Rev E 85:066130CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceStony Brook UniversityStony BrookUSA

Personalised recommendations