The topological structure of complex networks has fascinated researchers for several decades, resulting in the discovery of many universal properties and reoccurring characteristics of different kinds of networks. However, much less is known today about the network dynamics: indeed, complex networks in reality are not static, but rather dynamically evolve over time. Our paper is motivated by the empirical observation that network evolution patterns seem far from random, but exhibit structure. Moreover, the specific patterns appear to depend on the network type, contradicting the existence of a " one fits it all " model. However, we still lack observables to quantify these intuitions, as well as metrics to compare graph evolutions. Such observables and metrics are needed for extrapolating or predicting evolutions, as well as for interpolating graph evolutions. To explore the many faces of graph dynamics and to quantify temporal changes, this paper suggests to build upon the concept of centrality, a measure of node importance in a network. In particular, we introduce the notion of centrality distance, a natural similarity measure for two graphs which depends on a given centrality, characterizing the graph type. Intuitively, centrality distances reflect the extent to which (non-anonymous) node roles are different or, in case of dynamic graphs, have changed over time, between two graphs. We evaluate the centrality distance approach for five evolutionary models and seven real-world social and physical networks. Our results empirically show the usefulness of centrality distances for characterizing graph dynamics compared to a null-model of random evolution, and highlight the differences between the considered scenarios. Interestingly, our approach allows us to compare the dynamics of very different networks, in terms of scale and evolution speed.
Graph structures are often characterized by the frequency of small patterns called @cite_17 @cite_0 @cite_13 @cite_37 , also known as @cite_24 , or @cite_10 . Another important graph characterization, which is studied in this paper, are @cite_25 . Dozens of different centrality indices have been defined over the last years, and their study is still ongoing, with no unified theory yet. We believe that our centrality distance framework can provide new inputs for this discussion.
@cite_37 @cite_10 @cite_0 @cite_24 @cite_13 @cite_25 @cite_17
2241780750 1967385589 2034942944 1973450591
Measuring the relative importance of each vertex in a network is one of the most fundamental building blocks in network analysis. Among several importance measures, betweenness centrality, in particular, plays key roles in many real applications. Considerable effort has been made for developing algorithms for static settings. However, real networks today are highly dynamic and are evolving rapidly, and scalable dynamic methods that can instantly reflect graph changes into centrality values are required. In this paper, we present the first fully dynamic method for managing betweenness centrality of all vertices in a large dynamic network. Its main data structure is the weighted hyperedge representation of shortest paths called hypergraph sketch. We carefully design dynamic update procedure with theoretical accuracy guarantee. To accelerate updates, we further propose two auxiliary data structures called two-ball index and special-purpose reachability index. Experimental results using real networks demonstrate its high scalability and efficiency. In particular, it can reflect a graph change in less than a millisecond on average for a large-scale web graph with 106M vertices and 3.7B edges, which is several orders of magnitude larger than the limits of previous dynamic methods. We study the response of complex networks subject to attacks on vertices and edges. Several existing complex network models as well as real-world networks of scientific collaborations and Internet traffic are numerically investigated, and the network performance is quantitatively measured by the average inverse geodesic length and the size of the largest connected subgraph. For each case of attacks on vertices and edges, four different attacking strategies are used: removals by the descending order of the degree and the betweenness centrality, calculated for either the initial network or the current network during the removal procedure. It is found that the removals by the recalculated degrees and betweenness centralities are often more harmful than the attack strategies based on the initial network, suggesting that the network structure changes as important vertices or edges are removed. Furthermore, the correlation between the betweenness centrality and the degree in complex networks is studied. Given a connected graph G and a failure probability p(e) for each edge e in G, the reliability of G is the probability that G remains connected when each edge e is removed independently with probability p(e). In this paper it is shown that every n-vertex graph contains a sparse backbone, i.e., a spanning subgraph with O(nlogn) edges whose reliability is at least (1-n^-^@W^(^1^)) times that of G. Moreover, for any pair of vertices s, t in G, the (s,t)-reliability of the backbone, namely, the probability that s and t remain connected, is also at least (1-n^-^@W^(^1^)) times that of G. Our proof is based on a polynomial time randomized algorithm for constructing the backbone. In addition, it is shown that the constructed backbone has nearly the same Tutte polynomial as the original graph (in the quarter-plane x>=1, y>1), and hence the graph and its backbone share many additional features encoded by the Tutte polynomial. The significance of an entity in a network is generally given by the centrality value of its vertex. For most analysis purposes, only the high ranked vertices are required. However, most algorithms calculate the centrality values of all the vertices. We present an extremely fast and scalable algorithm for identifying the high closeness centrality vertices, using group testing. We show that our approach is significantly faster (best-case over 50 times, worst-case over 7 times) than the currently used methods. We can also use group testing to identify networks that are sensitive to edge perturbation.