MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413825311 · doi:10.14778/3725688.3725693

Efficient Historical Butterfly Counting in Large Temporal Bipartite Networks via Graph Structure-Aware Index

2025· article· en· W4413825311 on OpenAlexaff
Qiuyang Mang, Jingbang Chen, Hangrui Zhou, Yu Gao, Yingli Zhou, Richard Peng, Yixiang Fang, Chenhao Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBipartite graphComputer scienceButterflyGraphIndex (typography)Theoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bipartite graphs are ubiquitous in many domains, e.g., e-commerce platforms, social networks, and academia, by modeling interactions between distinct entity sets. Within these graphs, the butterfly motif, a complete 2×2 biclique, represents the simplest yet significant subgraph structure, crucial for analyzing complex network patterns. Counting the butterflies offers significant benefits across various applications, including community analysis and recommender systems. Additionally, the temporal dimension of bipartite graphs, where edges activate within specific time frames, introduces the concept of historical butterfly counting, i.e., counting butterflies within a given time interval. This temporal analysis sheds light on the dynamics and evolution of network interactions, offering new insights into their mechanisms. Despite its importance, no existing algorithm can efficiently solve the historical butterfly counting task. To address this, we design two novel indices whose memory footprints are dependent on #butterflies and #wedges, respectively. Combining these indices, we propose a graph structure-aware indexing approach that significantly reduces memory usage while preserving exceptional query speed. To further reduce the index size and boost the query efficiency, we design an index compression strategy, enabling the fast, high-quality, and unbiased approximation of historical butterfly counts. We theoretically prove that our approach is particularly advantageous on power-law graphs, a common characteristic of real-world bipartite graphs, by surpassing traditional complexity barriers for general graphs. Extensive experiments reveal that our query algorithms outperform existing methods by up to five magnitudes, effectively balancing speed with manageable memory requirements.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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