Finding Top-k Shortest Path Distance Changes in an Evolutionary Network

  • Manish Gupta
  • Charu C. Aggarwal
  • Jiawei Han
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6849)

Abstract

Networks can be represented as evolutionary graphs in a variety of spatio-temporal applications. Changes in the nodes and edges over time may also result in corresponding changes in structural garph properties such as shortest path distances. In this paper, we study the problem of detecting the top-k most significant shortest-path distance changes between two snapshots of an evolving graph. While the problem is solvable with two applications of the all-pairs shortest path algorithm, such a solution would be extremely slow and impractical for very large graphs. This is because when a graph may contain millions of nodes, even the storage of distances between all node pairs can become inefficient in practice. Therefore, it is desirable to design algorithms which can directly determine the significant changes in shortest path distances, without materializing the distances in individual snapshots. We present algorithms that are up to two orders of magnitude faster than such a solution, while retaining comparable accuracy.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aggarwal, C.C. (ed.): Social Network Data Analytics. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahuja, R.K., Magnanti, T.L., Orlin, J.B.: Network Flows: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1993)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahuja, R.K., Orlin, J.B., Pallottino, S., Scutella, M.G.: Dynamic shortest paths minimizing travel times and costs. Networks 41, 205 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Henzinger, M., King, V.: Maintaining minimum spanning forests in dynamic graphs. SIAM Journal on Computing 31(2), 364–374 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akoglu, L., McGlohon, M., Faloutsos, C.: oddball: Spotting Anomalies in Weighted Graphs. In: Zaki, M.J., Yu, J.X., Ravindran, B., Pudi, V. (eds.) PAKDD 2010. LNCS, vol. 6119, pp. 410–421. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chabini, I., Ganugapati, S.: Parallel algorithms for dynamic shortest path problems. International Transactions in Operational Research 9(3), 279–302 (2002)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chakrabarti, D., Kumar, R., Tomkins, A.: Evolutionary clustering. In: KDD, pp. 554–560 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chakraborty, D., Chakraborty, G., Shiratori, N.: A dynamic multicast routing satisfying multiple qos constraints. Int. J. Network Management 13(5), 321–335 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cherkassky, B.V., Goldberg, A.V., Silverstein, C.: Buckets, heaps, lists, and monotone priority queues. In: SODA (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cohen, E.: Estimating the size of the transitive closure in linear time. In: FOCS (1994)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dijkstra, E.W.: A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numerische Mathematik 1, 269–271 (1959)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Doreian, P., Stokman, F.: Evolution of social networks. Gordon and Breach Publishers, New York (1997)MATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eberle, W., Holder, L.: Discovering structural anomalies in graph-based data. In: ICDMW, pp. 393–398 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Floyd, R.W.: Algorithm 97: Shortest path. Commun. ACM 5(6), 345 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Johnson, D.B.: Efficient algorithms for shortest paths in sparse networks. J. ACM 24(1), 1–13 (1977)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Karypis, G., Kumar, V.: A fast and high quality multilevel scheme for partitioning irregular graphs. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 20(1), 359–392 (1998)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leskovec, J., Kleinberg, J., Faloutsos, C.: Graph evolution: Densification and shrinking diameters. ACM TKDD 1(1), 2 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Papadimitriou, P., Dasdan, A., Garcia-Molina, H.: Web graph similarity for anomaly detection (poster). In: WWW, pp. 1167–1168 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Roditty, L., Zwick, U.: On dynamic shortest paths problems. In: Albers, S., Radzik, T. (eds.) ESA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3221, pp. 580–591. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shimbel, A.: Structural parameters of communication networks. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 15, 501–507 (1953)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Warshall, S.: A theorem on boolean matrices. J. ACM 9(1), 11–12 (1962)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhu, S., Huang, G.M.: A new parallel and distributed shortest path algorithm for hierarchically clustered data networks. IEEE Trans. Parallel Dist. Syst. 9(9), 841–855 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Newman, M.E.J., Girvan, M.: Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Review E 69 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brandes, U.: A faster algorithm for betweenness centrality. Journal of Mathematical Sociology 25(2), 163–177 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ding, B., Yu, J.X., Qin, L.: Finding time-dependent shortest paths over large graphs. In: EDBT, pp. 205–216 (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chon, H.D., Agrawal, D., Abbadi, A.E.: FATES: Finding A Time Dependent Shortest path. Mobile Data Management, 165–180 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manish Gupta
    • 1
  • Charu C. Aggarwal
    • 2
  • Jiawei Han
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUSA
  2. 2.IBM T.J. Watson Research CenterUSA

Personalised recommendations