Bayesian graph edit distance

This paper describes a novel framework for comparing and matching corrupted relational graphs. The paper develops the idea of edit-distance originally introduced for graph-matching by Sanfeliu and Fu [1]. We show how the Levenshtein distance can be used to model the probability distribution for structural errors in the graph-matching problem. This probability distribution is used to locate matches using MAP label updates. We compare the resulting graph-matching algorithm with that recently reported by Wilson and Hancock. The use of edit-distance offers an elegant alternative to the exhaustive compilation of label dictionaries. Moreover, the method is polynomial rather than exponential in its worst-case complexity. We support our approach with an experimental study on synthetic data and illustrate its effectiveness on an uncalibrated stereo correspondence problem. This demonstrates experimentally that the gain in efficiency is not at the expense of quality of match

Structural matching by discrete relaxation

This paper describes a Bayesian framework for performing relational graph matching by discrete relaxation. Our basic aim is to draw on this framework to provide a comparative evaluation of a number of contrasting approaches to relational matching. Broadly speaking there are two main aspects to this study. Firstly we locus on the issue of how relational inexactness may be quantified. We illustrate that several popular relational distance measures can be recovered as specific limiting cases of the Bayesian consistency measure. The second aspect of our comparison concerns the way in which structural inexactness is controlled. We investigate three different realizations ai the matching process which draw on contrasting control models. The main conclusion of our study is that the active process of graph-editing outperforms the alternatives in terms of its ability to effectively control a large population of contaminating clutter

Graphs in machine learning: an introduction

Graphs are commonly used to characterise interactions between objects of interest. Because they are based on a straightforward formalism, they are used in many scientific fields from computer science to historical sciences. In this paper, we give an introduction to some methods relying on graphs for learning. This includes both unsupervised and supervised methods. Unsupervised learning algorithms usually aim at visualising graphs in latent spaces and/or clustering the nodes. Both focus on extracting knowledge from graph topologies. While most existing techniques are only applicable to static graphs, where edges do not evolve through time, recent developments have shown that they could be extended to deal with evolving networks. In a supervised context, one generally aims at inferring labels or numerical values attached to nodes using both the graph and, when they are available, node characteristics. Balancing the two sources of information can be challenging, especially as they can disagree locally or globally. In both contexts, supervised and un-supervised, data can be relational (augmented with one or several global graphs) as described above, or graph valued. In this latter case, each object of interest is given as a full graph (possibly completed by other characteristics). In this context, natural tasks include graph clustering (as in producing clusters of graphs rather than clusters of nodes in a single graph), graph classification, etc. 1 Real networks One of the first practical studies on graphs can be dated back to the original work of Moreno [51] in the 30s. Since then, there has been a growing interest in graph analysis associated with strong developments in the modelling and the processing of these data. Graphs are now used in many scientific fields. In Biology [54, 2, 7], for instance, metabolic networks can describe pathways of biochemical reactions [41], while in social sciences networks are used to represent relation ties between actors [66, 56, 36, 34]. Other examples include powergrids [71] and the web [75]. Recently, networks have also been considered in other areas such as geography [22] and history [59, 39]. In machine learning, networks are seen as powerful tools to model problems in order to extract information from data and for prediction purposes. This is the object of this paper. For more complete surveys, we refer to [28, 62, 49, 45]. In this section, we introduce notations and highlight properties shared by most real networks. In Section 2, we then consider methods aiming at extracting information from a unique network. We will particularly focus on clustering methods where the goal is to find clusters of vertices. Finally, in Section 3, techniques that take a series of networks into account, where each network i

Data-efficient Neuroevolution with Kernel-Based Surrogate Models

Surrogate-assistance approaches have long been used in computationally expensive domains to improve the data-efficiency of optimization algorithms. Neuroevolution, however, has so far resisted the application of these techniques because it requires the surrogate model to make fitness predictions based on variable topologies, instead of a vector of parameters. Our main insight is that we can sidestep this problem by using kernel-based surrogate models, which require only the definition of a distance measure between individuals. Our second insight is that the well-established Neuroevolution of Augmenting Topologies (NEAT) algorithm provides a computationally efficient distance measure between dissimilar networks in the form of "compatibility distance", initially designed to maintain topological diversity. Combining these two ideas, we introduce a surrogate-assisted neuroevolution algorithm that combines NEAT and a surrogate model built using a compatibility distance kernel. We demonstrate the data-efficiency of this new algorithm on the low dimensional cart-pole swing-up problem, as well as the higher dimensional half-cheetah running task. In both tasks the surrogate-assisted variant achieves the same or better results with several times fewer function evaluations as the original NEAT.Comment: In GECCO 201

Graph edit distance from spectral seriation

This paper is concerned with computing graph edit distance. One of the criticisms that can be leveled at existing methods for computing graph edit distance is that they lack some of the formality and rigor of the computation of string edit distance. Hence, our aim is to convert graphs to string sequences so that string matching techniques can be used. To do this, we use a graph spectral seriation method to convert the adjacency matrix into a string or sequence order. We show how the serial ordering can be established using the leading eigenvector of the graph adjacency matrix. We pose the problem of graph-matching as a maximum a posteriori probability (MAP) alignment of the seriation sequences for pairs of graphs. This treatment leads to an expression in which the edit cost is the negative logarithm of the a posteriori sequence alignment probability. We compute the edit distance by finding the sequence of string edit operations which minimizes the cost of the path traversing the edit lattice. The edit costs are determined by the components of the leading eigenvectors of the adjacency matrix and by the edge densities of the graphs being matched. We demonstrate the utility of the edit distance on a number of graph clustering problems