A unifying framework of rating users and data items in peer-to-peer and social networks



We propose a unifying family of quadratic cost functions to be used in Peer-to-Peer ratings. We show that our approach is general since it captures many of the existing algorithms in the fields of visual layout, collaborative filtering and Peer-to-Peer rating, among them Koren spectral layout algorithm, Katz method, Spatial ranking, Personalized PageRank and Information Centrality. Besides of the theoretical interest in finding common basis of algorithms that where not linked before, we allow a single efficient implementation for computing those various rating methods. We introduce a distributed solver based on the Gaussian Belief Propagation algorithm which is able to efficiently and distributively compute a solution to any single cost function drawn from our family of quadratic cost functions. By implementing our algorithm once, and choosing the computed cost function dynamically on the run we allow a high flexibility in the selection of the rating method deployed in the Peer-to-Peer network. Using simulations over real social network topologies obtained from various sources, including the MSN Messenger social network, we demonstrate the applicability of our approach. We report simulation results using networks of millions of nodes.


Peer-to-peer Social networks Collaborative filtering Gaussian belief propagation Katz method Spatial ranking 


  1. 1.
    Moallemi CC, Van Roy B (2006) Consensus propagation. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52(11):4753–4766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Johnson J, Malioutov D, Willsky A (2005) Walk-sum interpretation and analysis of Gaussian Belief Propagation. In: NIPS 05’, Vancouver, 5–10 December 2005Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grinstead CM, Laurie Snell J (1997) Introduction to probability. The CHANCE Project. Chapter 11 - Markov chains. http://www.dartmouth.edu/ chance/teaching_aids/books_articles/probability_book/pdf.html
  4. 4.
    Brin S, Page L (1998) The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on World Wide Web, vol 7. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 107–117Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Weiss Y, Freeman WT (1999) Correctness of belief propagation in Gaussian graphical models of arbitrary topology. In: NIPS-12, Denver, 30 November–2 December 1999Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Malioutov DM, Johnson JK, Willsky AS (2006) Walk-sums and belief propagation in Gaussian graphical models. J Mach Learn Res 7:2031–2064 (October)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crammer K, Singer Y (2001) Pranking with ranking. In: Proceedings of the conference on neural information processing systems (NIPS)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Doyle PG, Snell JL (1984) Random walks and electrical networks. The mathematical association of America. http://arxiv.org/abs/math.PR/0001057
  9. 9.
    Brandes U, Fleisch D (2005) Centrality measures based on current flow. In: STACS 2005, LNCS 3404, Stuttgart, 24–26 February 2005, pp 533–544Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Benczur A, Csalogany K, Sarlos T (2005) On the feasibility of low-rank approximation for personalized PageRank. In: Poster proceedings of the 14th international World Wide Web conference (WWW), Chiba, 10–14 May 2005, pp 972–973Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bickson D, Dolev D, Shental O, Siegel PH, Wolf JK (2007) Linear detection via belief propagation. In: The 45th annual allerton conference on communication, control, and computing, Allerton House, Illinois, September 2007Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koren Y (2003) On spectral graph drawing. In: Proceedings of the 9th international computing and combinatorics conference (COCOON’03). Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2697. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 496–508Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bickson D, Malkhi D, Zhou L (2007) Peer to peer rating. In: The 7th IEEE Peer-to-Peer Computing, Galway, Ireland, September 2007Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Katz L (1953) A new status index derived from sociometric analysis. Psychometrika 18:39–43MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hall KM (1970) An r-dimensional quadratic placement algorithm. Manage Sci 17:219–229MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    DellAmico M (2007) Mapping small worlds. In: The 7th IEEE Peer-to-Peer computing, Galway, Ireland, September 2007Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnson JK, Malioutov D, Willsky AS (2007) Lagrangian relaxation for MAP estimation in graphical models. In: The 45th annual Allerton conference on communication, control and computing, Monticello, September 2007.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bell R, Koren Y (2007) Scalable collaborative filtering with jointly derived neighborhood interpolation weights. In: IEEE international conference on data mining (ICDM’07). IEEE, PiscatawayGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Elidan G, McGraw I, Koller D (2006) Residual belief propagation: informed scheduling for asynchronous message passing. In: Proceedings of the twenty-second conference on uncertainty in AI (UAI), Cambridge, 13 July 2006Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    DIMES (2006) The DIMES project. http://www.netdimes.org
  21. 21.
    Web research collections. http://ir.dcs.gla.ac.uk/test_collections
  22. 22.
    Pajek - A program for large network analysis. http://vlado.fmf.unilj.si/pub/networks/pajek/
  23. 23.
    Bickson D, Shental O, Dolev D, Siegel PH, Wolf JK (2008) Gaussian belief propagation based multiuser detection. In: IEEE Int. Symp. Inform. Theory (ISIT), July 2008, Toronto, Canada (to appear)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael
  2. 2.Microsoft Research, Silicon ValleyMountain ViewUSA

Personalised recommendations