Provable and Practical Approximations for the Degree Distribution using Sublinear Graph Samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The degree distribution is one of the most fundamental properties used in the analysis of massive graphs. There is a large literature on graph sampling, where the goal is to estimate properties (especially the degree distribution) of a large graph through a small, random sample. Estimating the degree distribution of real-world graphs poses a significant challenge, due to their heavy-tailed nature and the large variance in degrees. We design a new algorithm, SADDLES, for this problem, using recent mathematical techniques from the field of sublinear algorithms. The SADDLES algorithm gives provably accurate outputs for all values of the degree distribution. For the analysis, we define two fatness measures of the degree distribution, called the h-index and the z-index. We prove that SADDLES is sublinear in the graph size when these indices are large. A corollary of this result is a provably sublinear algorithm for any degree distribution bounded below by a power law. We deploy our new algorithm on a variety of real datasets and demonstrate its excellent empirical behavior. In all instances, we get extremely accurate approximations for all values in the degree distribution by observing at most $1%$ of the vertices. This is a major improvement over the state-of-the-art sampling algorithms, which typically sample more than $10%$ of the vertices to give comparable results. We also observe that the h and z-indices of real graphs are large, validating our theoretical analysis.
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 | 0.006 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".