Memetic Multilevel Hypergraph Partitioning

Hypergraph partitioning has a wide range of important applications such as VLSI design or scientific computing. With focus on solution quality, we develop the first multilevel memetic algorithm to tackle the problem. Key components of our contribution are new effective multilevel recombination and mutation operations that provide a large amount of diversity. We perform a wide range of experiments on a benchmark set containing instances from application areas such VLSI, SAT solving, social networks, and scientific computing. Compared to the state-of-the-art hypergraph partitioning tools hMetis, PaToH, and KaHyPar, our new algorithm computes the best result on almost all instances

TAPER: query-aware, partition-enhancement for large, heterogenous, graphs

Graph partitioning has long been seen as a viable approach to address Graph DBMS scalability. A partitioning, however, may introduce extra query processing latency unless it is sensitive to a specific query workload, and optimised to minimise inter-partition traversals for that workload. Additionally, it should also be possible to incrementally adjust the partitioning in reaction to changes in the graph topology, the query workload, or both. Because of their complexity, current partitioning algorithms fall short of one or both of these requirements, as they are designed for offline use and as one-off operations. The TAPER system aims to address both requirements, whilst leveraging existing partitioning algorithms. TAPER takes any given initial partitioning as a starting point, and iteratively adjusts it by swapping chosen vertices across partitions, heuristically reducing the probability of inter-partition traversals for a given pattern matching queries workload. Iterations are inexpensive thanks to time and space optimisations in the underlying support data structures. We evaluate TAPER on two different large test graphs and over realistic query workloads. Our results indicate that, given a hash-based partitioning, TAPER reduces the number of inter-partition traversals by around 80%; given an unweighted METIS partitioning, by around 30%. These reductions are achieved within 8 iterations and with the additional advantage of being workload-aware and usable online.Comment: 12 pages, 11 figures, unpublishe

Minimizing the average distance to a closest leaf in a phylogenetic tree

When performing an analysis on a collection of molecular sequences, it can be convenient to reduce the number of sequences under consideration while maintaining some characteristic of a larger collection of sequences. For example, one may wish to select a subset of high-quality sequences that represent the diversity of a larger collection of sequences. One may also wish to specialize a large database of characterized "reference sequences" to a smaller subset that is as close as possible on average to a collection of "query sequences" of interest. Such a representative subset can be useful whenever one wishes to find a set of reference sequences that is appropriate to use for comparative analysis of environmentally-derived sequences, such as for selecting "reference tree" sequences for phylogenetic placement of metagenomic reads. In this paper we formalize these problems in terms of the minimization of the Average Distance to the Closest Leaf (ADCL) and investigate algorithms to perform the relevant minimization. We show that the greedy algorithm is not effective, show that a variant of the Partitioning Among Medoids (PAM) heuristic gets stuck in local minima, and develop an exact dynamic programming approach. Using this exact program we note that the performance of PAM appears to be good for simulated trees, and is faster than the exact algorithm for small trees. On the other hand, the exact program gives solutions for all numbers of leaves less than or equal to the given desired number of leaves, while PAM only gives a solution for the pre-specified number of leaves. Via application to real data, we show that the ADCL criterion chooses chimeric sequences less often than random subsets, while the maximization of phylogenetic diversity chooses them more often than random. These algorithms have been implemented in publicly available software.Comment: Please contact us with any comments or questions