InfoNetOLAP: OLAP and Mining of Information Networks

  • Chen Chen
  • Feida Zhu
  • Xifeng Yan
  • Jiawei Han
  • Philip Yu
  • Raghu Ramakrishnan


Databases and data warehouse systems have been evolving from handling normalized spreadsheets stored in relational databases to managing and analyzing diverse application-oriented data with complex interconnecting structures. Responding to this emerging trend, information networks have been growing rapidly and showing their critical importance in many applications, such as the analysis of XML, social networks, Web, biological data, multimedia data, and spatiotemporal data. Can we extend useful functions of databases and data warehouse systems to handle network structured data? In particular, OLAP (On-Line Analytical Processing) has been a popular tool for fast and user-friendly multi-dimensional analysis of data warehouses. Can we OLAP information networks and perform mining tasks on top of that? Unfortunately, to our best knowledge, there are no OLAP tools available that can interactively view and analyze network structured data from different perspectives and with multiple granularities. In this chapter, we argue that it is critically important to OLAP such information network data and propose a novel InfoNetOLAP framework. According to this framework, given an information network data set with its nodes and edges associated with respective attributes, a multi-dimensional model can be built to enable efficient on-line analytical processing so that any portions of the information networks can be generalized/specialized dynamically, offering multiple, versatile views of the data set. The contributions of this work are threefold. First, starting from basic definitions, i.e., what are dimensions and measures in the InfoNetOLAP scenario, we develop a conceptual framework for data cubes constructed on the information networks. We also look into different semantics of OLAP operations and classify the framework into two major subcases: informational OLAP and topological OLAP. Second, we show how an information network cube can be materialized by calculating a special kind of measure called aggregated graph and how to implement it efficiently. This includes both full materialization and partial materialization where constraints are enforced to obtain an iceberg cube. As we can see, due to the increased structural complexity of data, aggregated graphs that depend on the underlying “graph” properties of the information networks are much harder to compute than their traditional OLAP counterparts. Third, to provide more flexible, interesting, and insightful OLAP of information networks, we further propose a discovery-driven multi-dimensional analysis model to ensure that OLAP is performed in an intelligent manner, guided by expert rules and knowledge discovery processes. We outline such a framework and discuss some challenging research issues for discovery-driven InfoNetOLAP.


Information Network Maximum Flow Data Cube Coauthor Network Heterogeneous Information Network 
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.
    D. Archambault, T. Munzner, and D. Auber. Topolayout: Multilevel graph layout by topological features. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 13(2):305–317, 2007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    K. S. Beyer and R. Ramakrishnan. Bottom-up computation of sparse and iceberg cubes. In SIGMOD Conference, pages 359–370, 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Boldi and S. Vigna. The WebGraph framework I: Compression techniques. In WWW, pages 595–602, 2004.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Chakrabarti and C. Faloutsos. Graph mining: Laws, generators, and algorithms. ACM Computing Surveys, 38(1), 2006.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Chan, J. Bailey, and C. Leckie. Discovering correlated spatio-temporal changes in evolving graphs. Knowledge and Information Systems, 16(1):53–96, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    V. Chandola and V. Kumar. Summarization – compressing data into an informative representation. Knowledge Information Systems, 12(3):355–378, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Chaudhuri and U. Dayal. An overview of data warehousing and olap technology. SIGMOD Record, 26(1):65–74, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. H. Cormen, C. E. Leiserson, R. L. Rivest, and C. Stein. Introduction to Algorithms. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Fang, N. Shivakumar, H. Garcia-Molina, Rajeev Motwani, and Jeffrey D. Ullman. Computing iceberg queries efficiently. In VLDB, pages 299–310, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. Gibson, R. Kumar, and A. Tomkins. Discovering large dense subgraphs in massive graphs. In VLDB, pages 721–732, 2005.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Gray, S. Chaudhuri, A. Bosworth, A. Layman, D. Reichart, M. Venkatrao, F. Pellow, and H. Pirahesh. Data cube: A relational aggregation operator generalizing group-by, cross-tab, and sub totals. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 1(1):29–53, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Gupta and I. S. Mumick. Materialized Views: Techniques, Implementations, and Applications. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    I. Herman, G. Melançon, and M. S. Marshall. Graph visualization and navigation in information visualization: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 6(1):24–43, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    G. Jeh and J. Widom. Mining the space of graph properties. In KDD, pages 187–196, 2004.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. Kossinets, J. M. Kleinberg, and D. J. Watts. The structure of information pathways in a social communication network. In KDD, pages 435–443, 2008.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Leskovec, J. M. Kleinberg, and C. Faloutsos. Graphs over time: densification laws, shrinking diameters and possible explanations. In KDD, pages 177–187, 2005.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    X. Li, J. Han, and H. Gonzalez. High-dimensional olap: A minimal cubing approach. In VLDB, pages 528–539, 2004.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    W. Lu, J. C. M. J., E. E. Milios, N. Japkowicz, and Y. Zhang. Node similarity in the citation graph. Knowledge and Information Systems, 11(1):105–129, 2007.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    S. Navlakha, R. Rastogi, and N. Shrivastava. Graph summarization with bounded error. In SIGMOD Conference, pages 419–432, 2008.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Y. Ng, M. I. Jordan, and Y. Weiss. On spectral clustering: Analysis and an algorithm. In NIPS, pages 849–856, 2001.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. T. Ng, L. V. S. Lakshmanan, J. Han, and A. Pang. Exploratory mining and pruning optimizations of constrained association rules. In SIGMOD Conference, pages 13–24, 1998.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    S. Raghavan and H. Garcia-Molina. Representing web graphs. In ICDE, pages 405–416, 2003.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    S. Sarawagi, R. Agrawal, and N. Megiddo. Discovery-driven exploration of olap data cubes. In EDBT, pages 168–182, 1998.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    P. Sen, G. M. Namata, M. Bilgic, L. Getoor, B. Gallagher, and T. Eliassi-Rad. Collective classification in network data. CS-TR-4905, University of Maryland, College Park, 2008.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    K. Stephenson and M. Zelen. Rethinking centrality: Methods and examples. Social Networks, 11(1):1–37, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Y. Sun, J. Han, P. Zhao, Z. Yin, H. Cheng, and T. Wu. Rankclus: Integrating clustering with ranking for heterogeneous information network analysis. In EDBT, pages 565–576, 2009.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Y. Tian, R. A. Hankins, and J. M. Patel. Efficient aggregation for graph summarization. In SIGMOD Conference, pages 567–580, 2008.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    N. Wang, S. Parthasarathy, K.-L. Tan, and A. K. H. Tung. Csv: visualizing and mining cohesive subgraphs. In SIGMOD Conference, pages 445–458, 2008.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    A. Y. Wu, M. Garland, and J. Han. Mining scale-free networks using geodesic clustering. In KDD, pages 719–724, 2004.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    X. Wu, V. Kumar, J. R. Quinlan, J. Ghosh, Q. Yang, H. Motoda, G. J. McLachlan, A. F. M. Ng, B. Liu, P. S. Yu, Z.-H. Zhou, M. S., D. J. Hand, and D. Steinberg. Top 10 algorithms in data mining. Knowledge and Information Systems, 14(1):1–37, 2008.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Y. Zhao, P. Deshpande, and J. F. Naughton. An array-based algorithm for simultaneous multidimensional aggregates. In SIGMOD Conference, pages 159–170, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chen Chen
    • 1
  • Feida Zhu
    • 1
  • Xifeng Yan
    • 2
  • Jiawei Han
    • 3
  • Philip Yu
    • 4
  • Raghu Ramakrishnan
    • 5
  1. 1.University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  2. 2.University of California at Santa BarbaraSanta BarbaraUSA
  3. 3.UIUCUrbanaUSA
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoChicagoUSA
  5. 5.Yahoo! ResearchSanta ClaraUSA

Personalised recommendations