skip to main content
10.1145/2736277.2741638acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesthewebconfConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Efficient Densest Subgraph Computation in Evolving Graphs

Published: 18 May 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Densest subgraph computation has emerged as an important primitive in a wide range of data analysis tasks such as community and event detection. Social media such as Facebook and Twitter are highly dynamic with new friendship links and tweets being generated incessantly, calling for efficient algorithms that can handle very large and highly dynamic input data. While either scalable or dynamic algorithms for finding densest subgraphs have been proposed, a viable and satisfactory solution for addressing both the dynamic aspect of the input data and its large size is still missing. We study the densest subgraph problem in the the dynamic graph model, for which we present the first scalable algorithm with provable guarantees. In our model, edges are added adversarially while they are removed uniformly at random from the current graph. We show that at any point in time we are able to maintain a 2(1+ε)-approximation of a current densest subgraph, while requiring O(polylog(n+r)) amortized cost per update (with high probability), where r is the total number of update operations executed and n is the maximum number of nodes in the graph. In contrast, a naive algorithm that recomputes a dense subgraph every time the graph changes requires Omega(m) work per update, where m is the number of edges in the current graph. Our theoretical analysis is complemented with an extensive experimental evaluation on large real-world graphs showing that (approximate) densest subgraphs can be maintained efficiently within hundred of microseconds per update.

References

[1]
DBLP dataset (October 2014). http://dblp.uni-trier.de/xml/.
[2]
Last.fm song network dataset - KONECT. http://konect.uni-koblenz.de/networks/lastfm_song.
[3]
Yahoo! Answers browsing behavior version 1.0. - Yahoo! Research Webscope Datasets. http://webscope.sandbox.yahoo.com.
[4]
T. Akiba, Y. Iwata, and Y. Yoshida. Fast exact shortest-path distance queries on large networks by pruned landmark labeling. In SIGMOD, 2013.
[5]
H. Aksu, M. Canim, Y.-C. Chang, I. Korpeoglu, and O. Ulusoy. Distributed k-core view materialization and maintenance for large dynamic graphs. IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Eng., 2014.
[6]
A. Angel, N. Koudas, N. Sarkas, D. Srivastava, M. Svendsen, and S. Tirthapura. Dense subgraph maintenance under streaming edge weight updates for real-time story identification. The VLDB Journal, 2014.
[7]
A. Angel, N. Sarkas, N. Koudas, and D. Srivastava. Dense subgraph maintenance under streaming edge weight updates for real-time story identification. PVLDB, 2012.
[8]
B. Bahmani, A. Goel, and K. Munagala. Efficient primal-dual algorithms for mapreduce. Manuscript, 2012.
[9]
B. Bahmani, R. Kumar, M. Mahdian, and E. Upfal. Pagerank on an evolving graph. In KDD, 2012.
[10]
B. Bahmani, R. Kumar, and S. Vassilvitskii. Densest subgraph in streaming and mapreduce. PVLDB, 2012.
[11]
O. D. Balalau, F. Bonchi, T.-H. Chan, F. Gullo, and M. Sozio. Finding subgraphs with maximum total density and limited overlap. In WSDM, 2015.
[12]
S. Bhattacharya, M. Henzinger, D. Nanongkai, and C. E. Tsourakakis. Space- and Time-Efficient Algorithm for Maintaining Dense Subgraphs on One-Pass Dynamic Streams. In STOC, (to appear), 2015.
[13]
M. Brunato, H. H. Hoos, and R. Battiti. On effectively finding maximal quasi-cliques in graphs. In Learning and Intelligent Optimization. 2008.
[14]
G. Buehrer and K. Chellapilla. A scalable pattern mining approach to web graph compression with communities. In WSDM, pages 95--106. ACM, 2008.
[15]
Ò. Celma Herrada. Music recommendation and discovery in the long tail. Technical report, 2009.
[16]
M. Charikar. Greedy approximation algorithms for finding dense components in a graph. In Approximation Algorithms for Combinatorial Optimization. 2000.
[17]
J. Chen and Y. Saad. Dense subgraph extraction with application to community detection. IEEE Trans. on Knowledge and Data Eng., 2012.
[18]
E. Cohen, E. Halperin, H. Kaplan, and U. Zwick. Reachability and distance queries via 2-hop labels. SIAM Journal on Computing, 2003.
[19]
Y. Dourisboure, F. Geraci, and M. Pellegrini. Extraction and classification of dense communities in the web. In WWW, 2007.
[20]
D. Gibson, R. Kumar, and A. Tomkins. Discovering large dense subgraphs in massive graphs. In VLBD, 2005.
[21]
A. V. Goldberg. Finding a maximum density subgraph. UC Berkeley, 1984.
[22]
B. H. Hall, A. B. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg. The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2001.
[23]
G. F. Italiano, D. Eppstein, and Z. Galil. Dynamic graph algorithms. Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook, 1999.
[24]
R. Jin, Y. Xiang, N. Ruan, and D. Fuhry. 3-hop: a high-compression indexing scheme for reachability query. In SIGMOD, 2009.
[25]
S. Khuller and B. Saha. On finding dense subgraphs. In Automata, Languages and Programming. 2009.
[26]
R. Kumar, J. Novak, and A. Tomkins. Structure and evolution of online social networks. In KDD, 2006.
[27]
R. Kumar, P. Raghavan, S. Rajagopalan, and A. Tomkins. Trawling the web for emerging cyber-communities. Computer networks, 1999.
[28]
P. Lee, L. V. Lakshmanan, and E. Milios. CAST: A Context-Aware Story-Teller for Streaming Social Content. In CIKM, 2014.
[29]
V. E. Lee, N. Ruan, R. Jin, and C. Aggarwal. A survey of algorithms for dense subgraph discovery. In Managing and Mining Graph Data. Springer, 2010.
[30]
J. Leskovec, J. Kleinberg, and C. Faloutsos. Graph evolution: Densification and shrinking diameters. ACM Trans. KDD, 2007.
[31]
R.-H. Li, J. Yu, and R. Mao. Efficient core maintenance in large dynamic graphs. IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2014.
[32]
N. Mishra, R. Schreiber, I. Stanton, and R. E. Tarjan. Finding strongly knit clusters in social networks. Internet Mathematics, 2008.
[33]
D. Peleg. Distributed computing. SIAM Monographs on discrete mathematics and applications, 2000.
[34]
B. Saha, A. Hoch, S. Khuller, L. Raschid, and X. Zhang. Dense subgraphs with restrictions and applications to gene annotation graphs. In RECOMB, 2010.
[35]
B. Saha, A. Hoch, S. Khuller, L. Raschid, and X.-N. Zhang. Dense subgraphs with restrictions and applications to gene annotation graphs. In Research in Computational Molecular Biology, 2010.
[36]
A. E. Sarıyüce, B. Gedik, G. Jacques-Silva, K.-L. Wu, and Ü. V. Çatalyürek. Streaming algorithms for k-core decomposition. PVLDB, 2013.
[37]
A. D. Sarma, A. Lall, D. Nanongkai, and A. Trehan. Dense subgraphs on dynamic networks. In Distributed Computing. 2012.
[38]
S. B. Seidman. Network structure and minimum degree. Social networks, 1983.
[39]
M. Sozio and A. Gionis. The community-search problem and how to plan a successful cocktail party. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD, 2010, pages 939--948, 2010.
[40]
C. Tsourakakis, F. Bonchi, A. Gionis, F. Gullo, and M. Tsiarli. Denser than the densest subgraph: Extracting optimal quasi-cliques with quality guarantees. In KDD, 2013.
[41]
E. Valari, M. Kontaki, and A. N. Papadopoulos. Discovery of top-k dense subgraphs in dynamic graph collections. In Scientific and Statistical Database Management, 2012.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
WWW '15: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web
May 2015
1460 pages
ISBN:9781450334693

Sponsors

  • IW3C2: International World Wide Web Conference Committee

In-Cooperation

Publisher

International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee

Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland

Publication History

Published: 18 May 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. approximation algorithm
  2. densest subgraph
  3. dynamic graph

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • MIUR
  • Google Inc
  • NSF

Conference

WWW '15
Sponsor:
  • IW3C2

Acceptance Rates

WWW '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 131 of 929 submissions, 14%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,899 of 8,196 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)149
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10
Reflects downloads up to 27 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media