skip to main content
research-article
Free Access
Just Accepted

A family of centrality measures for graph data based on subgraphs

Authors Info & Claims
Online AM:23 February 2024Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We present the theoretical foundations and first experimental study of a new approach in centrality measures for graph data. The main principle is straightforward: the more relevant subgraphs around a vertex, the more central it is in the network. We formalize the notion of “relevant subgraphs” by choosing a family of subgraphs that, given a graph G and a vertex v, assigns a subset of connected subgraphs of G that contains v. Any of such families defines a measure of centrality by counting the number of subgraphs assigned to the vertex, i.e., a vertex will be more important for the network if it belongs to more subgraphs in the family. We show several examples of this approach. In particular, we propose the All-Subgraphs (All-Trees) centrality, a centrality measure that considers every subgraph (tree). We study fundamental properties over families of subgraphs that guarantee desirable properties over the centrality measure. Interestingly, All-Subgraphs and All-Trees satisfy all these properties, showing their robustness as centrality notions. To conclude the theoretical analysis, we study the computational complexity of counting certain families of subgraphs and show a linear time algorithm to compute the All-Subgraphs and All-Trees centrality for graphs with bounded treewidth. Finally, we implemented these algorithms and computed these measures over more than one hundred real-world networks. With this data, we present an empirical comparison between well-known centrality measures and those proposed in this work.

References

  1. Taras Agryzkov, Leandro Tortosa, José F Vicent, and Richard Wilson. 2019. A centrality measure for urban networks based on the eigenvector centrality concept. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 46, 4(2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Alfred Aho, John Hopcroft, and Jeffrey Ullman. 1974. The Design and Analysis of Computer Algorithms. Addison-Wesley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Renzo Angles, Marcelo Arenas, Pablo Barceló, Aidan Hogan, Juan L. Reutter, and Domagoj Vrgoc. 2017. Foundations of Modern Query Languages for Graph Databases. ACM Comput. Surv. 50, 5 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Sanjeev Arora and Boaz Barak. 2009. Computational complexity: a modern approach. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Sambaran Bandyopadhyay, Ramasuri Narayanam, and M Narasimha Murty. 2018. A Generic Axiomatic Characterization for Measuring Influence in Social Networks. In ICPR.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Alex Bavelas. 1950. Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 22, 6 (1950).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Hans L Bodlaender. 1997. Treewidth: Algorithmic techniques and results. In International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Hans L Bodlaender and Arie MCA Koster. 2010. Treewidth computations I. Upper bounds. Information and Computation 208, 3 (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Paolo Boldi, Alessandro Luongo, and Sebastiano Vigna. 2017. Rank monotonicity in centrality measures. Network Science 5, 4 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Paolo Boldi and Sebastiano Vigna. 2014. Axioms for centrality. Internet Mathematics 10, 3-4 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Phillip Bonacich. 1987. Power and centrality: A family of measures. American journal of sociology 92, 5 (1987).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Stephen Borgatti and Martin Everett. 2006. A graph-theoretic perspective on centrality. Social networks 28, 4 (2006).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Ulrik Brandes. 2005. Network analysis: methodological foundations. Vol.  3418. Springer Science & Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Sergey Brin and Lawrence Page. 1998. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Computer networks and ISDN systems 30, 1-7 (1998).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Sebastián Bugedo. 2024. Centrality Algorithms. https://github.com/Motif-Based-Centralities/Centrality-Algorithms.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Carlos Buil-Aranda, Martın Ugarte, Marcelo Arenas, and Michel Dumontier. 2015. A preliminary investigation into SPARQL query complexity and federation in Bio2RDF. In AMW.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Gerald G Carter and Gerald S Wilkinson. 2013. Food sharing in vampire bats: reciprocal help predicts donations more than relatedness or harassment. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 280, 1753(2013).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Caroline Casey, Isabelle Charrier, Nicolas Mathevon, and Colleen Reichmuth. 2015. Rival assessment among northern elephant seals: evidence of associative learning during male–male contests. Royal Society open science 2, 8 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Steve Chien, Cynthia Dwork, Ravi Kumar, Daniel R Simon, and D Sivakumar. 2004. Link evolution: Analysis and algorithms. Internet mathematics 1, 3 (2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Vincent Cicirello. 2019. Kendall tau sequence distance: Extending Kendall tau from ranks to sequences. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.02752(2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Bruno Courcelle and Joost Engelfriet. 2012. Graph structure and monadic second-order logic: a language-theoretic approach. Vol.  138. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Thomas M Cover and Joy A Thomas. 2012. Elements of information theory. John Wiley & Sons.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Manuel Curado, Leandro Tortosa, Jose F Vicent, and Gevorg Yeghikyan. 2020. Analysis and comparison of centrality measures applied to urban networks with data. Journal of Computational Science 43 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Stephen Davis, Babak Abbasi, Shrupa Shah, Sandra Telfer, and Mike Begon. 2015. Spatial analyses of wildlife contact networks. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 12, 102 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Shermin de Silva, Volker Schmid, and George Wittemyer. 2017. Fission–fusion processes weaken dominance networks of female Asian elephants in a productive habitat. Behavioral Ecology 28, 1 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Zoltán Dezső and Albert-László Barabási. 2002. Halting viruses in scale-free networks. Phys. Rev. E 65(2002). Issue 5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Ernesto Estrada and Juan A Rodriguez-Velazquez. 2005. Subgraph centrality in complex networks. Physical Review E 71, 5 (2005).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Mohammad Reza Faghani and Uyen Trang Nguyen. 2013. A study of XSS worm propagation and detection mechanisms in online social networks. IEEE transactions on information forensics and security 8, 11(2013).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Mathias Franz, Jeanne Altmann, and Susan C Alberts. 2015. Knockouts of high-ranking males have limited impact on baboon social networks. Current Zoology 61, 1 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Linton C Freeman. 1977. A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry (1977).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Linton C Freeman. 1978. Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification. Social Networks 1(1978).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Francisco Damasceno Freitas, Joost Rommes, and Nelson Martins. 2008. Gramian-based reduction method applied to large sparse power system descriptor models. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 23, 3 (2008).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Manuj Garg. 2009. Axiomatic foundations of centrality in networks. Available at SSRN 1372441(2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Georg Gottlob, Gianluigi Greco, Nicola Leone, and Francesco Scarcello. 2016. Hypertree Decompositions: Questions and Answers. In PODS.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Catarina Gouveia, Ágnes Móréh, and Ferenc Jordán. 2021. Combining centrality indices: maximizing the predictability of keystone species in food webs. Ecological Indicators 126 (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Randi H Griffin and Charles L Nunn. 2012. Community structure and the spread of infectious disease in primate social networks. Evolutionary Ecology 26, 4 (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Aric A. Hagberg, Daniel A. Schult, and Pieter J. Swart. 2008. Exploring Network Structure, Dynamics, and Function using NetworkX. In Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conference. Pasadena, CA USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Xiaojia He, Natarajan Meghanathan, et al. 2016. Alternatives to Betweenness Centrality: A Measure of Correlation Coefficient. In CS & IT Conference Proceedings, Vol.  6. CS & IT Conference Proceedings.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Aidan Hogan, Andreas Harth, Jürgen Umbrich, Sheila Kinsella, Axel Polleres, and Stefan Decker. 2011. Searching and browsing linked data with swse: The semantic web search engine. Journal of web semantics 9, 4 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Gábor Iván and Vince Grolmusz. 2010. When the Web meets the cell: using personalized PageRank for analyzing protein interaction networks. Bioinformatics 27, 3 (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Hawoong Jeong, Sean P Mason, A-L Barabási, and Zoltan N Oltvai. 2001. Lethality and centrality in protein networks. Nature 411, 6833 (2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Mark Jerrum. 1994. Counting Trees in a graph is #P-complete. Inform. Process. Lett. 51 (1994).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Ferenc Jordán, Zsófia Benedek, and János Podani. 2007. Quantifying positional importance in food webs: a comparison of centrality indices. Ecological Modelling 205, 1-2 (2007).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Leo Katz. 1953. A new status index derived from sociometric analysis. Psychometrika 18, 1 (1953).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Donald E Knuth. 1993. The Stanford GraphBase: a platform for combinatorial computing. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Dirk Koschützki, Henning Schwöbbermeyer, and Falk Schreiber. 2007. Ranking of network elements based on functional substructures. Journal of Theoretical Biology 248, 3 (2007).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Harold J Leavitt. 1951. Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance.The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 46, 1(1951).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Cong Li, Qian Li, Piet Van Mieghem, H Eugene Stanley, and Huijuan Wang. 2015. Correlation between centrality metrics and their application to the opinion model. The European Physical Journal B 88, 3 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Miaomiao Liu, Yang Wang, Jing Chen, Yongsheng Zhang, et al. 2022. Link prediction model for weighted networks based on evidence theory and the influence of common neighbours. Complexity (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Johannes Lorey and Felix Naumann. 2013. Detecting SPARQL query templates for data prefetching. In Extended Semantic Web Conference. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Jose L Martinez-Rodriguez, Aidan Hogan, and Ivan Lopez-Arevalo. 2020. Information extraction meets the semantic web: a survey. Semantic Web 11, 2 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Philipp Moritz, Robert Nishihara, Stephanie Wang, Alexey Tumanov, Richard Liaw, Eric Liang, Melih Elibol, Zongheng Yang, William Paul, Michael I Jordan, et al. 2018. Ray: A distributed framework for emerging AI applications. In OSDI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Gonzalo Navarro. 2016. Compact data structures: A practical approach. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Neo4j. 2024. Centrality algorithms. https://neo4j.com/docs/graph-data-science/current/algorithms/centrality/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Mark Newman. 2018. Networks. Oxford university press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Mark EJ Newman. 2006. Finding community structure in networks using the eigenvectors of matrices. Physical review E 74, 3 (2006).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Stuart Oldham, Ben Fulcher, Linden Parkes, Aurina Arnatkeviciūtė, Chao Suo, and Alex Fornito. 2019. Consistency and differences between centrality measures across distinct classes of networks. PloS one 14, 7 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Lawrence Page, Sergey Brin, Rajeev Motwani, and Terry Winograd. 1999. The PageRank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web.Technical Report. Stanford InfoLab.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Lauren E Quevillon, Ephraim M Hanks, Shweta Bansal, and David P Hughes. 2015. Social, spatial and temporal organization in a complex insect society. Scientific reports 5, 1 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Jennifer JH Reynolds, Ben T Hirsch, Stanley D Gehrt, and Meggan E Craft. 2015. Raccoon contact networks predict seasonal susceptibility to rabies outbreaks and limitations of vaccination. Journal of Animal Ecology 84, 6 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. Cristian Riveros and Jorge Salas. 2020. A family of centrality measures for graph data based on subgraphs. In ICDT.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Yannick Rochat. 2009. Closeness centrality extended to unconnected graphs: The harmonic centrality index. Technical Report.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Ryan A. Rossi and Nesreen K. Ahmed. 2015. The Network Data Repository with Interactive Graph Analytics and Visualization. In AAAI. https://networkrepository.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Gert Sabidussi. 1966. The centrality index of a graph. Psychometrika 31, 4 (1966).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Pratha Sah, Kenneth E Nussear, Todd C Esque, Christina M Aiello, Peter J Hudson, and Shweta Bansal. 2016. Inferring social structure and its drivers from refuge use in the desert tortoise, a relatively solitary species. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70, 8 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Chengcheng Shao, Pengshuai Cui, Peng Xun, Yuxing Peng, and Xinwen Jiang. 2018. Rank correlation between centrality metrics in complex networks: an empirical study. Open Physics 16, 1 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Andrii Shekhovtsov. 2021. How strongly do rank similarity coefficients differ used in decision making problems?Procedia Computer Science 192 (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Jinfang Sheng, Jinying Dai, Bin Wang, Guihua Duan, Jun Long, Junkai Zhang, Kerong Guan, Sheng Hu, Long Chen, and Wanghao Guan. 2020. Identifying influential nodes in complex networks based on global and local structure. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 541 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Oskar Skibski, Tomasz P Michalak, and Talal Rahwan. 2018. Axiomatic characterization of game-theoretic centrality. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 62 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Oskar Skibski, Talal Rahwan, Tomasz P Michalak, and Makoto Yokoo. 2016. Attachment centrality: An axiomatic approach to connectivity in networks. In AAMAS.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Oskar Skibski and Jadwiga Sosnowska. 2018. Axioms for distance-based centralities. In AAAI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Qawi K Telesford, Sean L Simpson, Jonathan H Burdette, Satoru Hayasaka, and Paul J Laurienti. 2011. The brain as a complex system: using network science as a tool for understanding the brain. Brain connectivity 1, 4 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. TigerGraph. 2024. Centrality algorithms. https://docs.tigergraph.com/graph-ml/current/centrality-algorithms/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Stojan Trajanovski, Javier Martín-Hernández, Wynand Winterbach, and Piet Van Mieghem. 2013. Robustness envelopes of networks. Journal of Complex Networks 1, 1 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Leslie G Valiant. 1979. The complexity of computing the permanent. Theoretical computer science 8, 2 (1979).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Rene van Dijk, Jennifer Kaden, Araceli Argüelles-Ticó, Deborah Dawson, Terry Burke, and Ben Hatchwell. 2014. Cooperative investment in public goods is kin directed in communal nests of social birds. Ecology letters 17, 9 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Jose L Walteros, Alexander Veremyev, Panos M Pardalos, and Eduardo L Pasiliao. 2019. Detecting critical node structures on graphs: A mathematical programming approach. Networks 73, 1 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. Tomasz Wąs and Oskar Skibski. 2018. An axiomatization of the eigenvector and Katz centralities. In AAAI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Erjia Yan and Ying Ding. 2009. Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60, 10 (2009).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  80. Xuemei You, Yinghong Ma, and Zhiyuan Liu. 2020. A three-stage algorithm on community detection in social networks. Knowledge-Based Systems 187 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. Wayne W Zachary. 1977. An information flow model for conflict and fission in small groups. Journal of anthropological research 33, 4 (1977).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. A family of centrality measures for graph data based on subgraphs
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Database Systems
          ACM Transactions on Database Systems Just Accepted
          ISSN:0362-5915
          EISSN:1557-4644
          Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2024 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM.

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Online AM: 23 February 2024
          • Accepted: 24 January 2024
          • Revised: 19 September 2023
          • Received: 27 January 2023
          Published in tods Just Accepted

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)100
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)44

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader