Group-Harmonic and Group-Closeness Maximization -- Approximation and Engineering
Centrality measures characterize important nodes in networks. Efficiently computing such nodes has received a lot of attention. When considering the generalization of computing central groups of nodes, challenging optimization problems occur. In this work, we study two such problems, group-harmonic...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Centrality measures characterize important nodes in networks. Efficiently
computing such nodes has received a lot of attention. When considering the
generalization of computing central groups of nodes, challenging optimization
problems occur. In this work, we study two such problems, group-harmonic
maximization and group-closeness maximization both from a theoretical and from
an algorithm engineering perspective.
On the theoretical side, we obtain the following results. For group-harmonic
maximization, unless $P=NP$, there is no polynomial-time algorithm that
achieves an approximation factor better than $1-1/e$ (directed) and $1-1/(4e)$
(undirected), even for unweighted graphs. On the positive side, we show that a
greedy algorithm achieves an approximation factor of $\lambda(1-2/e)$
(directed) and $\lambda(1-1/e)/2$ (undirected), where $\lambda$ is the ratio of
minimal and maximal edge weights. For group-closeness maximization, the
undirected case is $NP$-hard to be approximated to within a factor better than
$1-1/(e+1)$ and a constant approximation factor is achieved by a local-search
algorithm. For the directed case, however, we show that, for any
$\epsilon |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.48550/arxiv.2010.15435 |