skip to main content
research-article

Triadic Closure Sensitive Influence Maximization

Authors Info & Claims
Published:28 February 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The influence are not linked to any footnote in the text. Please check and suggest. maximization problem aims at selecting the k most influential nodes (i.e., seed nodes) from a social network, where the nodes can maximize the number of influenced nodes activated by a certain propagation model. However, the widely used Independent Cascade model shares the same propagation probability among substantial adjacent node pairs, which is too idealistic and unreasonable in practice. In addition, most heuristic algorithms for influence maximization need to update the expected influence of the remaining nodes in the seed selection process, resulting in high computation cost. To address these non-trivial problems, we propose a novel edge propagation probability calculation method. The method first utilizes the triadic closure structure of social networks to precisely measure the closeness between nodes and assigns different propagation probabilities to each edge, deriving a Triadic Closure-based Independent Cascade (TC-IC) model. Then, we further propose a heuristic influence maximization algorithm named Triadic Closure-based Influence Maximization (TC-IM). The algorithm evaluates the expected influence of a node by integrating the triadic closure weighted propagation probability and the triadic closure weighted degree. Especially, in the seed selection process, only the most influential node that has not been updated in the current round needs to be updated, which significantly improves the efficiency. Besides, we further provide theoretical proofs to guarantee the correctness of this updating strategy. Experimental results on nine real datasets and three propagation models demonstrate that: (1) The TC-IC model can set a proper propagation probability for each node pair, where the IM algorithms could easily identify influential nodes; (2) The TC-IM algorithm can significantly reduce the complexity through an efficient updating strategy with a comparable influence spread to the approximation IM algorithms; (3) Besides, the TC-IM algorithm also exhibits stable performance under other IC models including UIC and WIC, exhibiting good stability and generality.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Banerjee Prithu, Chen Wei, and Lakshmanan Laks V. S.. 2019. Maximizing welfare in social networks under a utility driven influence diffusion model. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD. ACM, 10781095.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. [2] Berger Jonah. 2014. Word of mouth and interpersonal communication: A review and directions for future research. Journal of Consumer Psychology 24, 4 (2014), 586607.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. [3] Borgs Christian, Brautbar Michael, Chayes Jennifer T., and Lucier Brendan. 2014. Maximizing social influence in nearly optimal time. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA. SIAM, 946957.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. [4] Bozorgi Arastoo, Samet Saeed, Kwisthout Johan, and Wareham Todd. 2017. Community-based influence maximization in social networks under a competitive linear threshold model. Knowledge-based Systems 134 (2017), 149158.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. [5] Cao Jiuxin, Min Huiyu, and Wang Haoran. 2019. Self-interest influence maximization algorithm based on subject preference in competitive environment. Chinese Journal of Computers 42, 07 (2019), 14951510.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. [6] Chen Jin and Qi Ziyi. 2020. Research on social network influence maximization algorithm based on time sequential relationship. Journal of Communications 41, 10 (2020), 211221.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. [7] Chen Shuo, Fan Ju, Li Guoliang, Feng Jianhua, Tan Kian-Lee, and Tang Jinhui. 2015. Online topic-aware influence maximization. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 8, 6 (2015), 666677.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. [8] Chen Wei, Lu Wei, and Zhang Ning. 2012. Time-critical influence maximization in social networks with time-delayed diffusion process. In Proceedings of the 26th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI,592598.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. [9] Chen Wei, Wang Yajun, and Yang Siyu. 2009. Efficient influence maximization in social networks. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 199208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. [10] Chen Wei, Wang Yajun, Yuan Yang, and Wang Qinshi. 2016. Combinatorial multi-armed bandit and its extension to probabilistically triggered arms. Journal of Machine Learning Research 17, 50 (2016), 133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. [11] Domingos Pedro and Richardson Matt. 2001. Mining the network value of customers. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, 5766.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. [12] Fellbaum Christiane and Miller George. 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. [13] Goyal Amit, Bonchi Francesco, and Lakshmanan Laks V. S.. 2010. Learning influence probabilities in social networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Web Search and Web Data Mining.Davison Brian D., Suel Torsten, Craswell Nick, and Liu Bing (Eds.), ACM, 241250.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. [14] Goyal Amit, Lu Wei, and Lakshmanan Laks V. S.. 2011. CELF++: Optimizing the greedy algorithm for influence maximization in social networks. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW’11. ACM, 4748.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. [15] He Qiang, Wang Xingwei, Lei Zhencheng, Huang Min, Cai Yuliang, and Ma Lianbo. 2019. TIFIM: A two-stage iterative framework for influence maximization in social networks. Applied Mathematics and Computation 354 (2019), 338352.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. [16] He Xinran, Song Guojie, Chen Wei, and Jiang Qingye. 2012. Influence blocking maximization in social networks under the competitive linear threshold model. In Proceedings of the 12th SIAM International Conference on Data Mining. SIAM/Omnipress, 463474.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. [17] Huang Hong, Dong Yuxiao, Tang Jie, Yang Hongxia, Chawla Nitesh V., and Fu Xiaoming. 2018. Will triadic closure strengthen ties in social networks? ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data 12, 3 (2018), 30:1–30:25.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. [18] Huang Keke, Tang Jing, Han Kai, Xiao Xiaokui, Chen Wei, Sun Aixin, Tang Xueyan, and Lim Andrew. 2020. Efficient approximation algorithms for adaptive influence maximization. VLDB Journal 29, 6 (2020), 13851406.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. [19] Jeong H. M., Mason S. P., Barabási A. L., and Oltvai Z. N.. 2001. Lethality and centrality in protein networks. Nature 411, 6833 (2001), 4142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. [20] Jianxin Tang, Ruisheng Zhang, Yabing Yao, Fan Yang, Zhili Zhao, Rongjing Hu, and Yongna Yuan. 2019. Identification of top-k influential nodes based on enhanced discrete particle swarm optimization for influence maximization. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 513 (2019), 477496.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. [21] Jin Di, Yu Zhizhi, Jiao Pengfei, Pan Shirui, He Dongxiao, Wu Jia, Yu Philip, and Zhang Weixiong. 2021. A survey of community detection approaches: From statistical modeling to deep learning. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (2021), Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. [22] Kempe David, Kleinberg Jon M., and Tardos Éva. 2003. Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 137146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. [23] Kempe David, Kleinberg Jon M., and Tardos Éva. 2005. Influential nodes in a diffusion model for social networks. In Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming. Springer, 11271138.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. [24] Kianian Sahar and Rostamnia Mehran. 2021. An efficient path-based approach for influence maximization in social networks. Expert Systems with Applications 167, 6 (2021), 114168.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. [25] Kunegis Jérôme. 2013. KONECT: The Koblenz network collection. In Proceedings of the 22nd International World Wide Web Conference, WWW’13. ACM, 13431350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. [26] Kutzkov Konstantin, Bifet Albert, Bonchi Francesco, and Gionis Aristides. 2013. STRIP: Stream learning of influence probabilities. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Dhillon Inderjit S., Koren Yehuda, Ghani Rayid, Senator Ted E., Bradley Paul, Parekh Rajesh, He Jingrui, Grossman Robert L., and Uthurusamy Ramasamy (Eds.), ACM, 275283.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. [27] Leskovec Jure, Kleinberg Jon M., and Faloutsos Christos. 2005. Graphs over time: Densification laws, shrinking diameters and possible explanations. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 177187.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. [28] Leskovec Jure, Kleinberg Jon M., and Faloutsos Christos. 2007. Graph evolution: Densification and shrinking diameters. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data 1, 1 (2007), 2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. [29] Leskovec Jure, Krause Andreas, Guestrin Carlos, Faloutsos Christos, VanBriesen Jeanne M., and Glance Natalie S.. 2007. Cost-effective outbreak detection in networks. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 420429.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. [30] Liu Bo, Cong Gao, Xu Dong, and Zeng Yifeng. 2012. Time constrained influence maximization in social networks. In Proceedings of the12th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, ICDM. IEEE Computer Society, 439448.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. [31] Liu Dong, Jing Yun, Zhao Jing, Wang Wenjun, and Song Guojie. 2017. A fast and efficient algorithm for mining top-k nodes in complex networks. Scientific Reports 7 (2017), 43330.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. [32] Liu Qi, Xiang Biao, Chen Enhong, Ge Yong, Xiong Hui, Bao Tengfei, and Zheng Yi. 2012. Influential seed items recommendation. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. ACM, 245248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. [33] Nguyen Duy-Linh, Nguyen Tri-Hai, Do Trong-Hop, and Yoo Myungsik. 2017. Probability-based multi-hop diffusion method for influence maximization in social networks. Wireless Personal Communications 93, 4 (2017), 903916.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. [34] Nguyen Hung T., Nguyen Tri P., Phan NhatHai, and Dinh Thang N.. 2017. Importance sketching of influence dynamics in billion-scale networks. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, ICDM’17. IEEE Computer Society, 337346.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. [35] Nguyen Hung T., Thai My T., and Dinh Thang N.. 2016. Stop-and-stare: Optimal sampling algorithms for viral marketing in billion-scale networks. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD’16. ACM, 695710.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. [36] Richardson Matthew and Domingos Pedro. 2002. Mining knowledge-sharing sites for viral marketing. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, 6170.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. [37] Sheikhahmadi Amir, Nematbakhsh Mohammad Ali, and Shokrollahi Arman. 2015. Improving detection of influential nodes in complex networks. Physica, A. Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 436 (2015), 833845.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. [38] Tang Jie, Sun Jimeng, Wang Chi, and Yang Zi. 2009. Social influence analysis in large-scale networks. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining.Association for Computing Machinery, 807816.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. [39] Tang Youze, Shi Yanchen, and Xiao Xiaokui. 2015. Influence maximization in near-linear time: A martingale approach. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data. ACM, 15391554.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. [40] Tang Youze, Xiao Xiaokui, and Shi Yanchen. 2014. Influence maximization: Near-optimal time complexity meets practical efficiency. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD’15. ACM, 7586.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. [41] Tao Hong and Qipeng Liu. 2019. Seeds selection for spreading in a weighted cascade model. Physica A-Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications 526 (2019), 120943.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. [42] Wang Weibo, Peng Zhaohui, Liu Ziyan, Zhu Tianchen, and Hong Xiaoguang. 2015. Learning the influence probabilities based on multipolar factors in social network. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management.Zhang Songmao, Wirsing Martin, and Zhang Zili (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9403. Springer, 512524.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. [43] Wang X., Su Y., Zhao C., and Yi D.. 2016. Effective identification of multiple influential spreaders by DegreePunishment. Physica A Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications 461 (2016), 238247.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. [44] Wang Zhixiao, Sun Chengcheng, Xi Jingke, and Li Xiaocui. 2021. Influence maximization in social graphs based on community structure and node coverage gain. Future Generation Computer Systems-the International Journal of Escience 118 (2021), 327338.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. [45] Watts D. J.. 2002. A simple model of global cascades on random networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99, 9 (2002), 57665771.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. [46] Yang Jaewon and Leskovec Jure. 2015. Defining and evaluating network communities based on ground-truth. Knowledge and Information Systems 42, 1 (2015), 181213. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. [47] Zhang Zizhu, Zhao Weiliang, Yang Jian, Paris Cécile, and Nepal Surya. 2019. Learning influence probabilities and modelling influence diffusion in Twitter. In Proceedings of the Companion of The 2019 World Wide Web Conference.Amer-Yahia Sihem, Mahdian Mohammad, Goel Ashish, Houben Geert-Jan, Lerman Kristina, McAuley Julian J., Baeza-Yates Ricardo, and Zia Leila (Eds.), ACM, 10871094.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. [48] Zhou Shi and Mondragón Raul J.. 2004. The rich-club phenomenon in the Internet topology. IEEE Communications Letters 8, 3 (2004), 180182.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. [49] Zhu Enqiang, Li Zepeng, Shao Zehui, Xu Jin, and Liu Chanjuan. 2015. Tree-core and tree-coritivity of graphs. Information Processing Letters 115, 10 (2015), 754759.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Triadic Closure Sensitive Influence Maximization

          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 Knowledge Discovery from Data
            ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data  Volume 17, Issue 6
            July 2023
            392 pages
            ISSN:1556-4681
            EISSN:1556-472X
            DOI:10.1145/3582889
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            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 ACM 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

            • Published: 28 February 2023
            • Online AM: 30 November 2022
            • Accepted: 24 November 2022
            • Revised: 23 November 2022
            • Received: 21 February 2022
            Published in tkdd Volume 17, Issue 6

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)211
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          Full Text

          View this article in Full Text.

          View Full Text

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format