Scaling Up Structural Clustering to Large Probabilistic Graphs Using Lyapunov Central Limit Theorem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structural clustering is one of the most widely used graph clustering frameworks. In this paper, we focus on structural clustering of probabilistic graphs, which comes with significant computational challenges and has, so far, resisted efficient solutions that are able to scale to large graphs, e.g. the state-of-art can only handle graphs with a few million edges. We address the main bottleneck step of probabilistic structural clustering, computing the structural similarity of vertices based on their Jaccard similarity over the set of possible worlds of a given probabilistic graph. The state-of-art used Dynamic Programming, a quadratic run-time algorithm, that does not scale to pairs of vertices of high degree. In this paper we present a novel approach based on Lyapunov Central Limit Theorem. By using a carefully chosen set of random variables we are able to cast the computation of structural similarity to computing a one-tailed area under the Normal Distribution. Our approach has linear runtime as opposed to quadratic, and as such, it scales to much larger inputs. Extensive experiments show that our approach can handle massive graphs at web-scale which the state-of-art cannot.
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 | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".