MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111238704 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2012.04553

Pattern Morphing for Efficient Graph Mining

2020· preprint· en· W3111238704 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphingComputer scienceGraphTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graph mining applications analyze the structural properties of large graphs, and they do so by finding subgraph isomorphisms, which makes them computationally intensive. Existing graph mining techniques including both custom graph mining applications and general-purpose graph mining systems, develop efficient execution plans to speed up the exploration of the given query patterns that represent subgraph structures of interest. In this paper, we step beyond the traditional philosophy of optimizing the execution plans for a given set of patterns, and exploit the sub-structural similarities across different query patterns. We propose Pattern Morphing, a technique that enables structure-aware algebra over patterns to accurately infer the results for a given set of patterns using the results of a completely different set of patterns that are less expensive to compute. Pattern morphing "morphs" (or converts) a given set of query patterns into alternative patterns, while retaining full equivalency. It is a general technique that supports various operations over matches of a pattern beyond just counting (e.g., support calculation, enumeration, etc.), making it widely applicable to various graph mining applications like Motif Counting and Frequent Subgraph Mining. Since pattern morphing mainly transforms query patterns before their exploration starts, it can be easily incorporated in existing general-purpose graph mining systems. We evaluate the effectiveness of pattern morphing by incorporating it in Peregrine, a recent state-of-the-art graph mining system, and show that pattern morphing significantly improves the performance of different graph mining applications.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.107 · 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