Adaptive Greedy versus Non-adaptive Greedy for Influence Maximization

We consider the \emph{adaptive influence maximization problem}: given a network and a budget $k$, iteratively select $k$ seeds in the network to maximize the expected number of adopters. In the \emph{full-adoption feedback model}, after selecting each seed, the seed-picker observes all the resulting adoptions. In the \emph{myopic feedback model}, the seed-picker only observes whether each neighbor of the chosen seed adopts. Motivated by the extreme success of greedy-based algorithms/heuristics for influence maximization, we propose the concept of \emph{greedy adaptivity gap}, which compares the performance of the adaptive greedy algorithm to its non-adaptive counterpart. Our first result shows that, for submodular influence maximization, the adaptive greedy algorithm can perform up to a $(1-1/e)$-fraction worse than the non-adaptive greedy algorithm, and that this ratio is tight. More specifically, on one side we provide examples where the performance of the adaptive greedy algorithm is only a $(1-1/e)$ fraction of the performance of the non-adaptive greedy algorithm in four settings: for both feedback models and both the \emph{independent cascade model} and the \emph{linear threshold model}. On the other side, we prove that in any submodular cascade, the adaptive greedy algorithm always outputs a $(1-1/e)$-approximation to the expected number of adoptions in the optimal non-adaptive seed choice. Our second result shows that, for the general submodular cascade model with full-adoption feedback, the adaptive greedy algorithm can outperform the non-adaptive greedy algorithm by an unbounded factor. Finally, we propose a risk-free variant of the adaptive greedy algorithm that always performs no worse than the non-adaptive greedy algorithm.Comment: 26 pages, 0 figure, accepted at AAAI'20: Thirty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligenc

Combining Traditional Marketing and Viral Marketing with Amphibious Influence Maximization

In this paper, we propose the amphibious influence maximization (AIM) model that combines traditional marketing via content providers and viral marketing to consumers in social networks in a single framework. In AIM, a set of content providers and consumers form a bipartite network while consumers also form their social network, and influence propagates from the content providers to consumers and among consumers in the social network following the independent cascade model. An advertiser needs to select a subset of seed content providers and a subset of seed consumers, such that the influence from the seed providers passing through the seed consumers could reach a large number of consumers in the social network in expectation. We prove that the AIM problem is NP-hard to approximate to within any constant factor via a reduction from Feige's k-prover proof system for 3-SAT5. We also give evidence that even when the social network graph is trivial (i.e. has no edges), a polynomial time constant factor approximation for AIM is unlikely. However, when we assume that the weighted bi-adjacency matrix that describes the influence of content providers on consumers is of constant rank, a common assumption often used in recommender systems, we provide a polynomial-time algorithm that achieves approximation ratio of $(1-1/e-\epsilon)^3$ for any (polynomially small) $\epsilon > 0$. Our algorithmic results still hold for a more general model where cascades in social network follow a general monotone and submodular function.Comment: An extended abstract appeared in the Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), 201

Probing Limits of Information Spread with Sequential Seeding

We consider here information spread which propagates with certain probability from nodes just activated to their not yet activated neighbors. Diffusion cascades can be triggered by activation of even a small set of nodes. Such activation is commonly performed in a single stage. A novel approach based on sequential seeding is analyzed here resulting in three fundamental contributions. First, we propose a coordinated execution of randomized choices to enable precise comparison of different algorithms in general. We apply it here when the newly activated nodes at each stage of spreading attempt to activate their neighbors. Then, we present a formal proof that sequential seeding delivers at least as large coverage as the single stage seeding does. Moreover, we also show that, under modest assumptions, sequential seeding achieves coverage provably better than the single stage based approach using the same number of seeds and node ranking. Finally, we present experimental results showing how single stage and sequential approaches on directed and undirected graphs compare to the well-known greedy approach to provide the objective measure of the sequential seeding benefits. Surprisingly, applying sequential seeding to a simple degree-based selection leads to higher coverage than achieved by the computationally expensive greedy approach currently considered to be the best heuristic

Fast and simple decycling and dismantling of networks

Decycling and dismantling of complex networks are underlying many important applications in network science. Recently these two closely related problems were tackled by several heuristic algorithms, simple and considerably sub-optimal, on the one hand, and time-consuming message-passing ones that evaluate single-node marginal probabilities, on the other hand. In this paper we propose a simple and extremely fast algorithm, CoreHD, which recursively removes nodes of the highest degree from the $2$-core of the network. CoreHD performs much better than all existing simple algorithms. When applied on real-world networks, it achieves equally good solutions as those obtained by the state-of-art iterative message-passing algorithms at greatly reduced computational cost, suggesting that CoreHD should be the algorithm of choice for many practical purposes