K-core decomposition of large networks on a single PC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studying the topology of a network is critical to inferring underlying dynamics such as tolerance to failure, group behavior and spreading patterns. k -core decomposition is a well-established metric which partitions a graph into layers from external to more central vertices. In this paper we aim to explore whether k -core decomposition of large networks can be computed using a consumer-grade PC. We feature implementations of the "vertex-centric" distributed protocol introduced by Montresor, De Pellegrini and Miorandi on GraphChi and Webgraph. Also, we present an accurate implementation of the Batagelj and Zaversnik algorithm for k -core decomposition in Webgraph. With our implementations, we show that we can efficiently handle networks of billions of edges using a single consumer-level machine within reasonable time and can produce excellent approximations in only a fraction of the execution time. To the best of our knowledge, our biggest graphs are considerably larger than the graphs considered in the literature. Next, we present an optimized implementation of an external-memory algorithm (EMcore) by Cheng, Ke, Chu, and Özsu. We show that this algorithm also performs well for large datasets, however, it cannot predict whether a given memory budget is sufficient for a new dataset. We present a thorough analysis of all algorithms concluding that it is viable to compute k -core decomposition for large networks in a consumer-grade PC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".