skip to main content
10.1145/3624062.3625129acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesscConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

cuAlign: Scalable Network Alignment on GPU Accelerators

Published:12 November 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Given two graphs, the objective of network alignment is to find a one-to-one mapping of vertices in one graph (A) to vertices in the other (B), such that the number of overlaps is maximized. We say that edges (i, j) ∈ A and (i′, j′) ∈ B are overlapped if i is mapped to i′ and j is mapped to j′. Network alignment is an important optimization problem with several applications in bioinformatics, computer vision and ontology matching. Since it is an NP-hard problem, efficient heuristics and scalable implementations are necessary. However, a combination of combinatorial and algebraic kernels within the network alignment algorithm poses significant hurdles for parallelization. Further, load imbalance and irregular DRAM traffic limit achievable performance on GPUs. In this work, we introduce a novel framework (cuAlign) that combines intra-network proximity using node (vertex) embedding, sparsification for computational efficiency, and belief propagation (BP) and approximate weighted matching for alignment. We demonstrate qualitative improvements up to over state-of-the-art approaches. We provide a scalable implementation targeting modern GPU accelerators. Our novel approach identifies and exploits unique structural properties of the BP-based algorithm and employs code fusion to reduce data movement between different steps of the algorithm. Using a diverse set of inputs, we demonstrate up to 19 × speedup for belief propagation, 3 × speedup for approximate weighted matching, and 15 × total, relative to a state-of-the-art multi-threaded implementation.

References

  1. Ahmet E Aladağ and Cesim Erten. 2013. SPINAL: scalable protein interaction network alignment. Bioinformatics 29, 7 (2013), 917–924.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Nir Atias and Roded Sharan. 2012. Comparative analysis of protein networks: hard problems, practical solutions. Commun. ACM 55, 5 (2012), 88–97.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Mohsen Bayati, Margot Gerritsen, David F Gleich, Amin Saberi, and Ying Wang. 2009. Algorithms for large, sparse network alignment problems. In 2009 Ninth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining. IEEE, 705–710.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Mohsen Bayati, David F. Gleich, Amin Saberi, and Ying Wang. 2013. Message-Passing Algorithms for Sparse Network Alignment. ACM Trans. Knowl. Discov. Data 7, 1, Article 3 (mar 2013), 31 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Rainer Burkard, Mauro Dell’Amico, and Silvano Martello. 2012. Assignment problems: revised reprint. SIAM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Hongyun Cai, Vincent W Zheng, and Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang. 2018. A comprehensive survey of graph embedding: Problems, techniques, and applications. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 30, 9 (2018), 1616–1637.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Xiyuan Chen, Mark Heimann, Fatemeh Vahedian, and Danai Koutra. 2020. Cone-align: Consistent network alignment with proximity-preserving node embedding. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 1985–1988.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Donatello Conte, Pasquale Foggia, Carlo Sansone, and Mario Vento. 2004. Thirty years of graph matching in pattern recognition. International journal of pattern recognition and artificial intelligence 18, 03 (2004), 265–298.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Catherine Fraikin, Yurii Nesterov, and Paul Van Dooren. 2008. A gradient-type algorithm optimizing the coupling between matrices. Linear Algebra Appl. 429, 5-6 (2008), 1229–1242.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Mahantesh Halappanavar, John Feo, Oreste Villa, Antonino Tumeo, and Alex Pothen. 2012. Approximate weighted matching on emerging manycore and multithreaded architectures. The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications 26, 4 (2012), 413–430.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Wei Hu, Yuzhong Qu, and Gong Cheng. 2008. Matching large ontologies: A divide-and-conquer approach. Data & Knowledge Engineering 67, 1 (2008), 140–160.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Arif M Khan, David F Gleich, Alex Pothen, and Mahantesh Halappanavar. 2012. A multithreaded algorithm for network alignment via approximate matching. In SC’12: Proceedings of the International Conference on High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis. IEEE, 1–11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Gunnar W Klau. 2009. A new graph-based method for pairwise global network alignment. BMC bioinformatics 10, 1 (2009), 1–9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. David Knossow, Avinash Sharma, Diana Mateus, and Radu Horaud. 2009. Inexact matching of large and sparse graphs using laplacian eigenvectors. In International workshop on graph-based representations in pattern recognition. Springer, 144–153.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Giorgos Kollias, Shahin Mohammadi, and Ananth Grama. 2011. Network similarity decomposition (nsd): A fast and scalable approach to network alignment. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 24, 12 (2011), 2232–2243.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Giorgos Kollias, Madan Sathe, Olaf Schenk, and Ananth Grama. 2014. Fast parallel algorithms for graph similarity and matching. J. Parallel and Distrib. Comput. 74, 5 (2014), 2400–2410.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Nitish Korula and Silvio Lattanzi. 2013. An efficient reconciliation algorithm for social networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1307.1690 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Oleksii Kuchaiev, Tijana Milenković, Vesna Memišević, Wayne Hayes, and Nataša Pržulj. 2010. Topological network alignment uncovers biological function and phylogeny. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 7, 50 (2010), 1341–1354.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Konstantin Makarychev, Rajsekar Manokaran, and Maxim Sviridenko. 2010. Maximum quadratic assignment problem: Reduction from maximum label cover and lp-based approximation algorithm. In International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming. Springer, 594–604.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Lei Meng, Aaron Striegel, and Tijana Milenković. 2016. Local versus global biological network alignment. Bioinformatics 32, 20 (2016), 3155–3164.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Misael Mongiovì and Roded Sharan. 2013. Global alignment of protein–protein interaction networks. In Data Mining for Systems Biology. Springer, 21–34.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Rob Patro and Carl Kingsford. 2012. Global network alignment using multiscale spectral signatures. Bioinformatics 28, 23 (2012), 3105–3114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Alex Pothen, S. M. Ferdous, and Fredrik Manne. 2019. Approximation algorithms in combinatorial scientific computing. Acta Numerica 28 (2019), 541–633.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Robert Preis. 1999. Linear time 1/2-approximation algorithm for maximum weighted matching in general graphs. In Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science. Springer, 259–269.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Ryan A Rossi, Di Jin, Sungchul Kim, Nesreen K Ahmed, Danai Koutra, and John Boaz Lee. 2020. On proximity and structural role-based embeddings in networks: Misconceptions, techniques, and applications. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (TKDD) 14, 5 (2020), 1–37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Venu Satuluri, Srinivasan Parthasarathy, and Yiye Ruan. 2011. Local Graph Sparsification for Scalable Clustering. In Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (Athens, Greece) (SIGMOD ’11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 721–732. https://doi.org/10.1145/1989323.1989399Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Rohit Singh, Jinbo Xu, and Bonnie Berger. 2007. Pairwise global alignment of protein interaction networks by matching neighborhood topology. In Annual international conference on research in computational molecular biology. Springer, 16–31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Amarnag Subramanya and Partha Pratim Talukdar. 2014. Graph-Based Semi-Supervised Learning. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning 8, 4 (2014), 1–125. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00590ED1V01Y201408AIM029 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.2200/S00590ED1V01Y201408AIM029Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Lizhi Xiang, Arif Khan, Edoardo Serra, Mahantesh Halappanavar, and Aravind Sukumaran-Rajam. 2021. cuTS: scaling subgraph isomorphism on distributed multi-GPU systems using trie based data structure. In Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis. 1–14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. L. Zeng, L. Zou, M. T. Özsu, L. Hu, and F. Zhang. 2020. GSI: GPU-friendly Subgraph Isomorphism. In 2020 IEEE 36th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE). 1249–1260. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE48307.2020.00112Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Si Zhang, Hanghang Tong, Jiejun Xu, Yifan Hu, and Ross Maciejewski. 2019. Origin: Non-rigid network alignment. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). IEEE, 998–1007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. cuAlign: Scalable Network Alignment on GPU Accelerators
        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
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          SC-W '23: Proceedings of the SC '23 Workshops of The International Conference on High Performance Computing, Network, Storage, and Analysis
          November 2023
          2180 pages
          ISBN:9798400707858
          DOI:10.1145/3624062

          Copyright © 2023 ACM

          Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of the United States government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 12 November 2023

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)59
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)14

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format