An automatic graph layout procedure to visualize correlated data

  • Mario Inostroza-Ponta
  • Regina Berretta
  • Alexandre Mendes
  • Pablo Moscato
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 217)


This paper introduces an automatic procedure to assist on the interpretation of a large dataset when a similarity metric is available. We propose a visualization approach based on a graph layout methodology that uses a Quadratic Assignment Problem (QAP) formulation. The methodology is presented using as testbed a time series dataset of the Standard & Poor’s 100, one the leading stock market indicators in the United States. A weighted graph is created with the stocks represented by the nodes and the edges’ weights are related to the correlation between the stocks’ time series. A heuristic for clustering is then proposed; it is based on the graph partition into disconnected subgraphs allowing the identification of clusters of highly-correlated stocks. The final layout corresponds well with the perceived market notion of the different industrial sectors. We compare the output of this procedure with a traditional dendogram approach of hierarchical clustering.


Weighted Graph Memetic Algorithm Local Search Method Quadratic Assignment Problem European Bioinformatics Institute 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    V.V. Gafiychuk, B. Yo. Datsko, and J. Izmaylova. Analysis of data clusters obtained by self-organizing methods. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 341:547–555, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    N. Basalto, R. Bellotti, F. De Carlo, P. Facchi, and S. Pascazio. Clustering stock market companies via chaotic map synchronization. Physica A: Statistical Me-chanics and its Applications, 345(1–2):196–206, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    V. Boginski, S. Butenko, and P.M. Pardalos. On structural properties of the market graph. In A. Nagurney, editor, Innovations in Financial and Economic Networks, pages 28–45. Edward Elgar Publishing Inc, 2003.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Sahni and T. González. P-complete approximation problems. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 23(3):555–565, 1976.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Burkard, E. Çela, P. Pardalos, and L. Pitsoulis. The quadratic assignment problem. In P. Pardalos and D. Du, editors, Handbook of Combinatorial Optimization, pages 241–338. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    E. Taillard. Robust taboo search for the quadratic assignment problem. Parallel Computing, 17(4–5):443–455, 1991.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    C.A. Oliveira, P.M. Pardalos, and M.G.C. Resende. Grasp with path-relinking for the quadratic assignment problem. In C.C. Ribeiro and S.L. Martins, editors, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, volume 3059, pages 356–368. Springer-Verlag, 2004.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Carrizo, F.G. Tinetti, and P. Moscato. A computational ecology for the quadratic assignment problem. In Proceedings of the 21st Meeting on Informatics and Operations Research, Buenos Aires, Argentina, August, 1992.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Merz and B. Freisleben. A comparison of memetic algorithms, tabu search and ant colonies for the quadratic assigment problem. In Proceedings of the 1999 International Congress of Evolutionary Computation (CEC’99), Washington DC, USA, 6–9 July, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Berretta and P. Moscato. The number partitioning problem: An open challenge for evolutionary computation? In D. Corne and M. Dorigo, editors, New Ideas in Optimization, pages 261–278. McGraw-Hill, 1999.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. S. Buriol, P.M. Franca, and P. Moscato. A new memetic algorithm for the asymmetric traveling salesman problem. Journal of Heuristics, 10(3):483–506, 2004.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    F. Glover and M. Laguna. Tabu Search. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, Massachusetts, 1997.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Ausloos and K. Ivanova. Mechanistic approach to generalized technical analysis of share prices and stock market indices. The European Physical Journal B, 27:177–187, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.M. Gonzalez-Barrios and A.J. Quiroz. A clustering procedure based on the comparison between the k nearest neighbors graph and the minimal spanning tree. Statistics & Probability Letters, 62(1):23–34, 2003.zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. Moscato, C. Cotta, and A. Mendes. Memetic algorithms. In G. Onwubolu and B. Babu, editors, New Optimization Techniques in Engineering, pages 53–86. Springer-Verlag, 2004.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. Moscato. Memetic algorithms. In P. Pardalos and M. Resende, editors, Hand-book of Applied Optimization. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2002.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. Moscato and C. Cotta. Memetic algorithms. In T.F. Gonzalez, editor, Handbook of Approximation Algorithms and Metaheuristics. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2006. to appear.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mario Inostroza-Ponta
    • 1
    • 2
  • Regina Berretta
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alexandre Mendes
    • 1
    • 2
  • Pablo Moscato
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Newcastle Bioinformatics Initiative School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Faculty of Engineering and Built EnvironmentThe University of NewcastleCallaghanAustralia
  2. 2.ARC Centre in BioinformaticsAustralia

Personalised recommendations