HashNWalk: Hash and Random Walk Based Anomaly Detection in Hyperedge Streams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sequences of group interactions, such as emails, online discussions, and co-authorships, are ubiquitous; and they are naturally represented as a stream of hyperedges (i.e., sets of nodes). Despite its broad potential applications, anomaly detection in hypergraphs (i.e., sets of hyperedges) has received surprisingly little attention, compared to anomaly detection in graphs. While it is tempting to reduce hypergraphs to graphs and apply existing graph-based methods, according to our experiments, taking higher-order structures of hypergraphs into consideration is worthwhile. We propose HashNWalk, an incremental algorithm that detects anomalies in a stream of hyperedges. It maintains and updates a constant-size summary of the structural and temporal information about the input stream. Using the summary, which is the form of a proximity matrix, HashNWalk measures the anomalousness of each new hyperedge as it appears. HashNWalk is (a) Fast: it processes each hyperedge in near real-time and billions of hyperedges within a few hours, (b) Space Efficient: the size of the maintained summary is a user-specific constant, (c) Effective: it successfully detects anomalous hyperedges in real-world hypergraphs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".