skip to main content
10.1145/3583131.3590396acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Q-Learning Ant Colony Optimization supported by Deep Learning for Target Set Selection

Published:12 July 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

The use of machine learning techniques within metaheuristics is a rapidly growing field of research. In this paper, we show how a deep learning framework can be beneficially used to improve an ant colony optimization algorithm. In particular, problem information obtained via deep learning is combined in our algorithm by means of Q-learning with the usual pheromone and greedy information. Our algorithm is applied to the Target Set Selection (TSS) problem, which is an NP-hard combinatorial optimization problem with applications, for example, in social networks. The specific problem variant considered in this paper asks for finding a smallest subset of the nodes of a given graph such that their influence can be spread to all other nodes of the graph via a diffusion process. The experimental results show, first, that the pure ant colony optimization approach can already compete with the state of the art. Second, the obtained results indicate that the hybrid algorithm variant outperforms the pure ant colony optimization approach especially in the context of large problem instances.

References

  1. Eyal Ackerman, Oren Ben-Zwi, and Guy Wolfovitz. 2010. Combinatorial model and bounds for target set selection. Theoretical Computer Science 411, 44--46 (2010), 4017--4022.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Oren Ben-Zwi, Danny Hermelin, Daniel Lokshtanov, and Ilan Newman. 2011. Treewidth governs the complexity of target set selection. Discrete Optimization 8, 1 (2011), 87--96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Yoshua Bengio, Andrea Lodi, and Antoine Prouvost. 2021. Machine learning for combinatorial optimization: A methodological tour d'horizon. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 290, 2 (2021), 405--421.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Chen Cai and Yusu Wang. 2020. A Note on Over-Smoothing for Graph Neural Networks. (2020). arXiv:2006.13318 http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.13318Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Moses Charikar, Yonatan Naamad, and Anthony Wirth. 2016. On Approximating Target Set Selection. In Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2016) (Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Vol. 60), Klaus Jansen, Claire Mathieu, José D. P. Rolim, and Chris Umans (Eds.). Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany, 4:1--4:16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Deli Chen, Yankai Lin, Wei Li, Peng Li, Jie Zhou, and Xu Sun. 2020. Measuring and relieving the over-smoothing problem for graph neural networks from the topological view. In AAAI 2020 - 34th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 3438--3445. arXiv:1909.03211 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Ning Chen. 2009. On the approximability of influence in social networks. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 23, 3 (2009), 1400--1415.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Wei Chen, Chi Wang, and Yajun Wang. 2010. Scalable influence maximization for prevalent viral marketing in large-scale social networks. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. 1029--1038.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Wei Chen, Yajun Wang, and Siyu Yang. 2009. Efficient influence maximization in social networks. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. 199--208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Morgan Chopin, André Nichterlein, Rolf Niedermeier, and Mathias Weller. 2014. Constant thresholds can make target set selection tractable. Theory of Computing Systems 55, 1 (2014), 61--83.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Gennaro Cordasco, Luisa Gargano, Marco Mecchia, Adele A Rescigno, and Ugo Vaccaro. 2015. A fast and effective heuristic for discovering small target sets in social networks. In Combinatorial Optimization and Applications. Springer, 193--208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Gennaro Cordasco, Luisa Gargano, and Adele Anna Rescigno. 2015. Influence Propagation over Large Scale Social Networks. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining 2015 (Paris, France) (ASONAM '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1531--1538. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Gennaro Cordasco, Luisa Gargano, and Adele A Rescigno. 2016. On finding small sets that influence large networks. Social Network Analysis and Mining 6, 1 (2016), 1--20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Omid E. David and Iddo Greental. 2014. Genetic Algorithms for Evolving Deep Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the Companion Publication of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (GECCO Comp '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1451--1452. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Shifei Ding, Chunyang Su, and Junzhao Yu. 2011. An optimizing BP neural network algorithm based on genetic algorithm. Artificial Intelligence Review 36, 2 (Feb 2011), 153--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Marco Dorigo and Thomas Stützle. 2004. Ant Colony Optimization. The MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Author Dummy. 2021. Adding Negative Learning to Ant Colony Optimization: A Comprehensive Study. Mathematics 9, 4 (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Author Dummy. 2022. A Biased Random Key Genetic Algorithm Applied to Target Set Selection in Viral Marketing. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Boston, Massachusetts) (GECCO '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 241--250.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Author Dummy. 2022. Boosting a Genetic Algorithm with Graph Neural Networks for Multi-Hop Influence Maximization in Social Networks. In Proceedigns of FedCSIS 2022 - 17th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems. IEEE, 363--371.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Stefan Ehard and Dieter Rautenbach. 2019. On some tractable and hard instances for partial incentives and target set selection. Discrete Optimization 34 (2019), 100547. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Matthias Fey and Jan E. Lenssen. 2019. Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometric. In ICLR Workshop on Representation Learning on Graphs and Manifolds.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Paola Flocchini, Rastislav Královič, Peter Ružička, Alessandro Roncato, and Nicola Santoro. 2003. On time versus size for monotone dynamic monopolies in regular topologies. Journal of Discrete Algorithms 1, 2 (2003), 129--150.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Angela K Fournier, Erin Hall, Patricia Ricke, and Brittany Storey. 2013. Alcohol and the social network: Online social networking sites and college students' perceived drinking norms. Psychology of Popular Media Culture 2, 2 (2013), 86.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Jacob Goldenberg, Barak Libai, and Eitan Muller. 2001. Using complex systems analysis to advance marketing theory development: Modeling heterogeneity effects on new product growth through stochastic cellular automata. Academy of Marketing Science Review 9, 3 (2001), 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Mark Granovetter. 1978. Threshold models of collective behavior. American journal of sociology 83, 6 (1978), 1420--1443.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. 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, Gaël Varoquaux, Travis Vaught, and Jarrod Millman (Eds.). Pasadena, CA USA, 11 -- 15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Will Hamilton, Zhitao Ying, and Jure Leskovec. 2017. Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, I. Guyon, U. Von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 30. Curran Associates, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Tim A Hartmann. 2018. Target set selection parameterized by clique-width and maximum threshold. In International Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Informatics. Springer, 137--149.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. E. Muller J.Goldenberg, B.Libai. 2001. Talk of the network: A complex systems look at the underlying process of word-of-mouth. Marketing Letters 12, 3 (2001), 211--223.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. David Kempe, Jon Kleinberg, and Éva Tardos. 2003. Maximizing the Spread of Influence through a Social Network. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (Washington, D.C.) (KDD '03). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 137--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Elias Khalil, Hanjun Dai, Yuyu Zhang, Bistra Dilkina, and Le Song. 2017. Learning Combinatorial Optimization Algorithms over Graphs. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, I. Guyon, U. Von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 30. Curran Associates, Inc. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2017/file/d9896106ca98d3d05b8cbdf4fd8b13a1-Paper.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Jure Leskovec and Andrej Krevl. 2014. SNAP Datasets: Stanford Large Network Dataset Collection. http://snap.stanford.edu/data.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Cheng Long and Raymond Chi-Wing Wong. 2011. Minimizing Seed Set for Viral Marketing. In 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining. 427--436. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Manuel López-Ibáñez, Jeremie Dubois-Lacoste, Leslie Pérez Cáceres, Mauro Birattari, and Thomas Stützle. 2016. The irace package: Iterated racing for automatic algorithm configuration. Operations Research Perspectives 3 (2016), 43--58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Vijay Mahajan, Eitan Muller, and Frank M Bass. 1990. New product diffusion models in marketing: A review and directions for research. Journal of marketing 54, 1 (1990), 1--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. André Nichterlein, Rolf Niedermeier, Johannes Uhlmann, and Mathias Weller. 2013. On tractable cases of target set selection. Social Network Analysis and Mining 3, 2 (2013), 233--256.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Rodrigo Olivares, Francisco Muñoz, and Fabián Riquelme. 2021. A multi-objective linear threshold influence spread model solved by swarm intelligence-based methods. Knowledge-Based Systems 212 (2021), 106623.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Santiago V. Ravelo, Cláudio N. Meneses, and Eduardo A.J. Anacleto. 2020. NP-hardness and evolutionary algorithm over new formulation for a Target Set Selection problem. In 2020 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC). 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. TV Thirumala Reddy, D Sai Krishna, and C Pandu Rangan. 2010. Variants of spreading messages. In International Workshop on Algorithms and Computation. Springer, 240--251.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Franco Scarselli, Marco Gori, Ah Chung Tsoi, Markus Hagenbuchner, and Gabriele Monfardini. 2008. The graph neural network model. IEEE transactions on neural networks 20, 1 (2008), 61--80.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Thomas C Schelling. 2006. Micromotives and macrobehavior. WW Norton & Company.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Paulo Shakarian, Abhivav Bhatnagar, Ashkan Aleali, Elham Shaabani, and Ruocheng Guo. 2015. Diffusion in social networks. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Paulo Shakarian, Sean Eyre, and Damon Paulo. 2013. A scalable heuristic for viral marketing under the tipping model. Social Network Analysis and Mining 3, 4 (2013), 1225--1248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Yuan Sun, Sheng Wang, Yunzhuang Shen, Xiaodong Li, Andreas T. Ernst, and Michael Kirley. 2022. Boosting ant colony optimization via solution prediction and machine learning. Computers & Operations Research 143 (2022), 105769.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Cheng Wang, Lili Deng, Gengui Zhou, and Meixian Jiang. 2014. A global optimization algorithm for target set selection problems. Information Sciences 267 (2014), 101--118. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Christopher JCH Watkins and Peter Dayan. 1992. Q-learning. Machine learning 8 (1992), 279--292.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Cong Zhang, Wen Song, Zhiguang Cao, Jie Zhang, Puay Siew Tan, and Xu Chi. 2020. Learning to Dispatch for Job Shop Scheduling via Deep Reinforcement Learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M.F. Balcan, and H. Lin (Eds.), Vol. 33. Curran Associates, Inc., 1621--1632. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/11958dfee29b6709f48a9ba0387a2431-Paper.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Jie Zhou, Ganqu Cui, Shengding Hu, Zhengyan Zhang, Cheng Yang, Zhiyuan Liu, Lifeng Wang, Changcheng Li, and Maosong Sun. 2020. Graph neural networks: A review of methods and applications., 57--81 pages. arXiv:1812.08434 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Q-Learning Ant Colony Optimization supported by Deep Learning for Target Set Selection

        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
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          GECCO '23: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
          July 2023
          1667 pages
          ISBN:9798400701191
          DOI:10.1145/3583131

          Copyright © 2023 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

          • Published: 12 July 2023

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

          Upcoming Conference

          GECCO '24
          Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
          July 14 - 18, 2024
          Melbourne , VIC , Australia
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)148
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader