MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621145626 · doi:10.14778/3099622.3099626

Attribute-driven community search

2017· article· en· W2621145626 on OpenAlexaff
Xin Huang, Laks V. S. Lakshmanan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceNode (physics)Theoretical computer scienceRelevance (law)GraphCommunity structureCohesion (chemistry)Data miningMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, community search over graphs has gained significant interest. In applications such as analysis of protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks, citation graphs, and collaboration networks, nodes tend to have attributes. Unfortunately, most previous community search algorithms ignore attributes and result in communities with poor cohesion w.r.t. their node attributes. In this paper, we study the problem of attribute-driven community search, that is, given an undirected graph G where nodes are associated with attributes, and an input query Q consisting of nodes V q and attributes W q , find the communities containing V q , in which most community members are densely inter-connected and have similar attributes. We formulate this problem as finding attributed truss communities (ATC), i.e., finding connected and close k-truss subgraphs containing V q , with the largest attribute relevance score. We design a framework of desirable properties that good score function should satisfy. We show that the problem is NP-hard. However, we develop an efficient greedy algorithmic framework to iteratively remove nodes with the least popular attributes, and shrink the graph into an ATC. In addition, we also build an elegant index to maintain k -truss structure and attribute information, and propose efficient query processing algorithms. Extensive experiments on large real-world networks with ground-truth communities show that our algorithms significantly outperform the state of the art and demonstrates their efficiency and effectiveness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations241
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207