diff options
| author | jeanpouget-abadie <jean.pougetabadie@gmail.com> | 2014-12-07 17:33:49 -0500 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | jeanpouget-abadie <jean.pougetabadie@gmail.com> | 2014-12-07 17:33:49 -0500 |
| commit | 6470fd53a89102b365aa1c0c288acf0076115a97 (patch) | |
| tree | a30bbd93047172dbe846e870b620ca6e119d52d7 /notes | |
| parent | 9c2d0453e83d7a2472a02bcc09fc7b2a5c79fc6a (diff) | |
| download | cascades-6470fd53a89102b365aa1c0c288acf0076115a97.tar.gz | |
related works
Diffstat (limited to 'notes')
| -rw-r--r-- | notes/reportYaron.tex | 37 |
1 files changed, 36 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/notes/reportYaron.tex b/notes/reportYaron.tex index d5822ed..be356d2 100644 --- a/notes/reportYaron.tex +++ b/notes/reportYaron.tex @@ -21,6 +21,21 @@ Given a set of observed cascades, the \textbf{graph reconstruction problem} cons There have been several works tackling the graph reconstruction problem in variants of the independent cascade. We briefly summarize their results and approaches below. +\begin{itemize} +\item Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez, Jure Leskovec, and Andreas Klause were amongst the first to tackle the problem of graph reconstruction from cascade observation \cite{gomez}. Their first method \textsc{NetInf}, and a series of other similar methods published subsequently, solves a heuristic which approximates a NP-hard maximum-likelihood formulation. Unfortunately \textsc{NetInf} has no known theoretical guarantees. One difficulty with comparing ourselves to their heuristic is that they assume a continuous time independent cascade model, which is close but un-adaptable to our framework. Namely, as we will see in Section~\ref{sec:icc}, nodes in our model cannot influence nodes beyond the time step at which they are active. +\item Their paper was later followed by a publication from Praneeth Netrapalli and Sujay Sanghavi \cite{netrapalli}, which provided two algorithms with several theoretical guarantees. + \begin{itemize} + \item The first algorithm they discuss is a convex and parallelizable optimization problem. However, the theoretical guarantee is close to perfect reconstruction of `strong' edges after ${\cal O}(d^2 \log n)$ with high probability. There are several problems to this result however. + \begin{itemize} + \item Researchers believe the true threshold of cascades necessary is closer to ${\cal O}(d \log n)$ + \item The constant in the big ${\cal O}$ is highly polynomial in the different constants, of the order of billions even for very generous initializations of these parameters + \item The authors make a highly restrictive assumption on the probabilities of each edge, which they call `correlation decay': $\forall i, \sum_{j \in {\cal N}(i)} p_{j,i} < 1 -\alpha$, where $0 < \alpha < 1$ + \end{itemize} + \item The second algorithm, to which we will compare ourselves in Section~\ref{sec:exp} + \end{itemize} +\item +\end{itemize} + \section{The Voter Model} @@ -123,7 +138,7 @@ b_1 = & \left( \begin{array}{c} \end{align*} \section{The Independent Cascade Model} - +\label{sec:icc} \subsection{Description} In the independent cascade model, nodes have three possible states: susceptible, infected or active\footnote{The words `infected' and `active' are used interchangeably}, and inactive. All nodes start either as susceptible or infected. The infected nodes at $t=0$ constitute the seed set. Similarly to the voter model, we will suppose that nodes are part of the seed set with independent probability $p_{\text{init}}$. At each time step $t$, for every pair of nodes $(j,i)$ where $j$ is infected and $i$ is susceptible, $j$ attempts to infect $i$ with probability $p_{j,i}$. If $j$ succeeds, $i$ will become active at time step $t+1$. Regardless of $j$'s success, node $j$ will be inactive at time $t+1$: nodes stay active for only one time step. The cascade continues until time step $T_k$ when no active nodes remain. @@ -245,6 +260,7 @@ In general, the smaller $\delta_k$ is, the better we can recover $k$-sparse vect \end{itemize} \section{Experiments} +\label{sec:exp} \subsection{Verifying the RIP constants} @@ -288,6 +304,25 @@ The results of our findings on a very small social network (a subset of the famo \begin{thebibliography}{42} +\bibitem{gomez} +Gomez-Rodriguez, M., Leskovec, J., and Krause, A. +\newblock {\it Inferring Networks of Diffusion and Influence} +\newblock In Proc. 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, KDD'10, pages 1019--1028, +\newblock 2010 + +\bibitem{netrapalli} +Netrapalli, P., and Sanghavi, S., +\newblock {\it Learning the Graph of Epidemic Cascades} +\newblock SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev., 40(1): 211--222, +\newblock 2012 + + +\bibitem{abrahao} +Abrahao, B., Chierichetti, F., Kleinberg, R., and Panconesi, A. +\newblock{Trace Complexity of Network Inference} +\newblock In Proc. 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mingin, KDD'13, pages 491--499, +\newblock 2013 + \bibitem{candestao} Candès, E. J., Romberg, J. K., and Tao, T. \newblock {\it Stable Signal Recovery from Incomplete and Inaccurate Measurements}, |
