Temporal network navigation
-
Upload
sang-hoon-lee -
Category
Science
-
view
268 -
download
0
Transcript of Temporal network navigation
Sang Hoon Lee (이상훈) School of Physics (물리학부), Korea Institute for Advanced Study (고등과학원)
http://newton.kias.re.kr/~lshlj82
Navigation on temporal networks
in collaboration with Petter Holme @ Sungkyunkwan University (성균관대학교)
2015년 가을 학술논문발표회 및 임시총회 [H12-St.01], 2015년 10월 23일 @
Navigation on spatial networks(Even?) simple organisms use chemotaxis to find a target.
Transport/navigation on road networks
Transport/navigation on road networks
“Which information do humans use?”
cognitive map (map in mind/brain)
Transport/navigation on road networks
Simplify! (distance/directional information)
“Which information do humans use?”
cognitive map (map in mind/brain)
l
amount of “useful” information
search timereal optimal path with
global information
random walk without any information
Information vs navigation efficiency (or “navigability”)
l
amount of “useful” information
search timereal optimal path with
global information
random walk without any information
Information vs navigation efficiency (or “navigability”)
cost to get info
l
amount of “useful” information
search timereal optimal path with
global information
random walk without any information
Information vs navigation efficiency (or “navigability”)
cost to get info
incomplete information
source
Greedy Spatial Navigation (GSN) protocol
SHL and P. Holme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 128701 (2012); Phys. Rev. E 86, 067103 (2012); Eur. Phys. J.-Spec. Top. 215, 135 (2013).
target
source
Greedy Spatial Navigation (GSN) protocol
SHL and P. Holme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 128701 (2012); Phys. Rev. E 86, 067103 (2012); Eur. Phys. J.-Spec. Top. 215, 135 (2013).
target
θ1
θ2
θ1 > θ2
source
Greedy Spatial Navigation (GSN) protocol
SHL and P. Holme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 128701 (2012); Phys. Rev. E 86, 067103 (2012); Eur. Phys. J.-Spec. Top. 215, 135 (2013).
target
GSN search
source
real shortest path
Greedy Spatial Navigation (GSN) protocol
SHL and P. Holme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 128701 (2012); Phys. Rev. E 86, 067103 (2012); Eur. Phys. J.-Spec. Top. 215, 135 (2013).
target
GSN search
source
real shortest path
random search
Greedy Spatial Navigation (GSN) protocol
SHL and P. Holme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 128701 (2012); Phys. Rev. E 86, 067103 (2012); Eur. Phys. J.-Spec. Top. 215, 135 (2013).
target
GSN search
real shortest path length = d
random search path length = dr
greedy spatial navigation (GSN) path length = dg
For a given network embedded in a metric space,
real shortest path length = d
random search path length = dr
greedy spatial navigation (GSN) path length = dg
For a given network embedded in a metric space,
GSN navigability ⌫ = d/dg
random navigability ⇣ = d/dr
GSN navigabilityrandom navigability
N = |V|: number of nodes
100 road network data: https://sites.google.com/site/lshlj82/road_data_2km.zip
diverse values for GSN navigability vs clear scaling for random navigability: GSN navigability reflects the real characteristics of city structures
Navigability profile for large urban areas (2 km ✕ 2 km samples)
observe that its absence helps the large volume of trafficfrom the upper left part to avoid entering the central part toreach the lower right part, and induce to take more efficientperipheral roads. Of course, the external geographic factorssuch as rivers, tunnels, bridges, and roads with variousspeed limits are also important in practice. We take thesimplest approach and assume the geographical contextprimarily gives a sense of direction for the navigation,and neglect other effects. For future work it would beinteresting to extend our work with other informationinto other navigability functions, e.g., Bureau of PublicRoads (BPR) function [16]. We also notice that road 3 inFig. 3(e) with the largest e value (and the second largest bvalue) corresponds to the Harvard bridge across theCharles River, illustrating the case of deducing the crucialinfrastructure based solely on the geometric positions,without explicit awareness of the river.
The multiple linear regression results shown in Table IIdemonstrate that predicting e values is not plausible fromthe linear combination of those network and geometricmeasures, with low R2 values. From the same regressionanalysis on much larger Switzerland and European rail-ways, we observe even smaller R2 values estimated by the104 sampled source-target pairs for each removal of edge.Therefore, e or the Braessiness is a uniquely measured onlyby considering this greedy behavior of navigators. Finally,we investigate whether there is any correlation betweennavigability and various socioeconomic indices. We se-lected the 20 largest cities in the United States (U.S.),Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Africa, respectively,(100 cities in total), and used the MERKAARTOR program[20] and extracted a representative sample of each city (asquare of 2 km sides). First, we compared ! and " to thenumbers of vertices N, as shown in Fig. 4. There is astriking difference between those two cases, where thereis a clear scaling relationship between " and N [Fig. 4(b)],meaning that the random navigation is statistically
determined by the system sizes. In contrast, the widelyscattered points in Fig. 4(a) strongly suggests that thenumbers of vertices cannot predict ! at all, in addition tothe fact that purely topological measures cannot predict ein Table II. In this respect, the ! obviously reflects uniqueproperties of different cities with vastly different develop-mental histories. We could not find such measures (orlinear combinations of them)—e.g., population density,median resident income, fraction of public transit commut-ers, etc.—showing statistically significant correlationswith the navigability. Again this leads to the conclusionthat different cities have unique properties of navigabilityindependent of other socioeconomic factors. One exampleis the correlation between the navigability and the popula-tion change ratio of the 20 cities in the U.S. defined asthe ratio of the population change between 1960 and2010 to the population in 1960 [21]. We observe a veryweak negative correlation between ! and the ratio[R2 ¼ 0:09ð3Þ$—too weak perhaps for claiming a mean-ingful conclusion dependence.In summary, we have introduced a new routing strategy
incorporating greedy movement and memory of naviga-tors. This strategy, we believe, is a minimal model consid-ering the basic concept of human psychology fornavigation, namely, incomplete navigational informationand the memory not to be lost. From the results from real-world road and railway structures, we demonstrate theimportant difference in terms of centralities for navigationand the fact that there exists the celebrated Braess’s para-dox caused by the navigators’ behavior just equipped withthis simple strategy. From the observation of correlationprofiles for centralities in road structures, we have shownthat the importance of each element heavily depends on thedetailed layout of structures. We have focused on the finalefficiency of the routing processes in this work, but thedetailed process of GSN, e.g., the relative distance towardthe target during the routing process or the prevalence ofbacktracking related to the structural properties of roads,can be worthwhile future work. This type of tool—linkingspatial cognition, the environment, and emergent naviga-tional properties—can be helpful for urban planners andarchitects [22].This research is supported by the Swedish Research
Council and theWCU program through NRF Korea fundedby MEST R31-2008-10029 (P. H.). The authors thank
TABLE II. Coefficients for the multiple linear regression e ¼m1bþm2ðlengthÞ þm3cþm4ðkikjÞ for road networks, withsome measures defined on edges: b, the edge length, the distancec from the midpoint of edges to the centroid of vertices, and theproduct kikj of degrees of vertices attached to edges. Thestatistical significance codes are <0:05, <0:01, and <0:001.
Road Boston NYC
m1 6.902c 9.389c
m2 &4:687' 10&5a &6:141' 10&5b
m3 &1:504' 10&6 2:142' 10&5a
m4 &8:817' 10&3b &5:653' 10&3a
Multiple R2 0:2508 0:1917p value 7:784' 10&9 3:395' 10&9
a<0:05.b<0:01.c<0:001.
0
0.1
0.2
102 1030
0.4
0.2
0.6
0.8
102 103
(a) (b)
USEurope
Asia
AfricaLatin America
N N
FIG. 4 (color online). Scatter plots for the ! (a) and " (b) vs thenumber of vertices N, for the 100 large cities in the world.
PRL 108, 128701 (2012) P HY S I CA L R EV I EW LE T T E R Sweek ending
23 MARCH 2012
128701-4
GSN navigability ⌫ = d/dg
random navigability ⇣ = d/dr
GSN navigability
random navigabilitySHL and P. Holme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 128701 (2012).
1234
time t
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representation
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
1
2
3
4!
node-centric timeline static representation
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representation
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representationsource
target
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
τ1→4
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representationsource
target
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
τ1→4
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representationsource
target
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
τ1→4
τ2→4
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representationsource
target
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
t = t0
source: node 3
target: node 4
τ1→4
τ2→4
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representation
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
t = t0
source: node 3
target: node 4
τ1→4
τ2→4
3 steps, τ2→4
1 step, τ1→4
t = t13t = t23
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representation
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
t = t0
source: node 3
target: node 4
τ1→4
τ2→4
3 steps, τ2→4
1 step, τ1→4
t = t13t = t23
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representation
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
t = t0
source: node 3
target: node 4
τ1→4
τ2→4
3 steps, τ2→4
1 step, τ1→4
t = t13t = t23
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
two “null model” strategies without using any information• Saramäki-Holme (SH)’s greedy walk: following every step
J. Saramäki and P. Holme, e-print arXiv:1508.00693.
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representation
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
1234
time t
t = t0
source: node 3
target: node 4
τ1→4
τ2→4
3 steps, τ2→4
1 step, τ1→4
t = t13t = t23
• only the time-respecting paths are allowed.
two “null model” strategies without using any information• Saramäki-Holme (SH)’s greedy walk: following every step
J. Saramäki and P. Holme, e-print arXiv:1508.00693.• “waiting for target” (WFT): waiting for the target indefinitely
1
2
3
4
node-centric timeline static representation
source
target
reviews on temporal networks: P. Holme and J. Saramäki, Phys. Rep. 519, 97 (2012); P. Holme, Eur. Phys. J. B 88, 234 (2015).
Navigation on temporal networks background cartoons by Mi Jin Lee
Temporal network datahttp://www.sociopatterns.org/datasets
Temporal network datahttp://www.sociopatterns.org/datasets
Temporal network datahttp://www.sociopatterns.org/datasets
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
num
ber o
f rea
chab
le n
odes
aver
age
time
time (sec)
reachable from node 0: our modelSH
WFTtime from node 0 this model: our model
SHWFT
“hospital” data: node 0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
num
ber o
f rea
chab
le n
odes
aver
age
time
time (sec)
reachable from node 0: our modelSH
WFTtime from node 0 this model: our model
SHWFT
“hospital” data: node 0
optimal time point when the reachability is maximum for our model?
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
num
ber o
f rea
chab
le n
odes
aver
age
time
time (sec)
reachable from node 0: our modelSH
WFTtime from node 0 this model: our model
SHWFT
“hospital” data: node 0
number of reachable nodes(reachability): WFT > our model > SH
1/(average time) (among reachable nodes):SH > our model > WFT
optimal time point when the reachability is maximum for our model?
correlation between aggregated network measures vs navigability measures
• accumulated degree and strength (the number of contacts)
• duration of presence• time to the first contact• Goh-Barabási burstiness of nodes
(coefficient of variation): K.-I. Goh and A.-L. Barabási, EPL 81, 48002 (2008)
B ⌘ �⌧ �m⌧
�⌧ +m⌧
where �⌧ and m⌧ are the standard deviation and
mean of the interevent time ⌧ , respectively
correlation between aggregated network measures vs navigability measures
• accumulated degree and strength (the number of contacts)
• duration of presence• time to the first contact• Goh-Barabási burstiness of nodes
(coefficient of variation): K.-I. Goh and A.-L. Barabási, EPL 81, 48002 (2008)
B ⌘ �⌧ �m⌧
�⌧ +m⌧
where �⌧ and m⌧ are the standard deviation and
mean of the interevent time ⌧ , respectively
Outlook and future works
• temporal network navigation based on history to investigate the temporal correlation structure of interactions, just like spatial greedy navigation to investigate the intrinsic navigability of spatial structures
• trying to find explanatory variables related to temporal navigability!
• more (temporal network) data?
the slides in .pdf: http://www.slideshare.net/lshlj82/temporal-network-navigation
Thank you for your attention! (… and if you didn’t pay your attention, that’s entirely my fault)