Streaming graph partitioning for large distributed graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extracting knowledge by performing computations on graphs is becoming increasingly challenging as graphs grow in size. A standard approach distributes the graph over a cluster of nodes, but performing computations on a distributed graph is expensive if large amount of data have to be moved. With-out partitioning the graph, communication quickly becomes a limiting factor in scaling the system up. Existing graph partitioning heuristics incur high computation and commu-nication cost on large graphs, sometimes as high as the fu-ture computation itself. Observing that the graph has to be loaded into the cluster, we ask if the partitioning can be done at the same time with a lightweight streaming algorithm. We propose natural, simple heuristics and compare their performance to hashing and METIS, a fast, offline heuristic. We show on a large collection of graph datasets that our heuristics are a significant improvement, with the best ob-taining an average gain of 76%. The heuristics are scalable in the size of the graphs and the number of partitions. Using our streaming partitioning methods, we are able to speed up PageRank computations on Spark [32], a distributed com-putation system, by 18 % to 39 % for large social networks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".