Abstract
We consider the problem of maximizing the spread of influence in a social network by choosing a fixed number of initial seeds, formally referred to as the influence maximization problem. It admits a (1−1/e)-factor approximation algorithm if the influence function is submodular. Otherwise, in the worst case, the problem is NP-hard to approximate to within a factor of N1−ε. This article studies whether this worst-case hardness result can be circumvented by making assumptions about either the underlying network topology or the cascade model. All our assumptions are motivated by many real-life social network cascades.
First, we present strong inapproximability results for a very restricted class of networks called the (stochastic) hierarchical blockmodel, a special case of the well-studied (stochastic) blockmodel in which relationships between blocks admit a tree structure. We also provide a dynamic-programming-based polynomial time algorithm, which optimally computes a directed variant of the influence maximization problem on hierarchical blockmodel networks. Our algorithm indicates that the inapproximability result is due to the bidirectionality of influence between agent-blocks.
Second, we present strong inapproximability results for a class of influence functions that are “almost” submodular, called 2-quasi-submodular. Our inapproximability results hold even for any 2-quasi-submodular f fixed in advance. This result also indicates that the “threshold” between submodularity and nonsubmodularity is sharp, regarding the approximability of influence maximization.
- Rico Angell and Grant Schoenebeck. 2017. Don,t be greedy: Leveraging community structure to find high quality seed sets for influence maximization. In Proceedings of the WINE. Springer, 16--29.Google Scholar
- W. B. Arthur. 1989. Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Econ. J. 99, 394 (1989), pp. 116--131. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2234208c.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lars Backstrom, Daniel P. Huttenlocher, Jon M. Kleinberg, and Xiangyang Lan. 2006. Group formation in large social networks: Membership, growth, and evolution. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Abhijit Banerjee, Arun G Chandrasekhar, Esther Duflo, and Matthew O Jackson. 2013. The diffusion of microfinance. Science 341, 6144 (2013).Google Scholar
- F. M. Bass. 1969. A new product growth for model consumer durables. Manage. Sci. 15, 5 (1969), 215--227. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shishir Bharathi, David Kempe, and Mahyar Salek. 2007. In Proceedings of the WINE. Springer, Berlin, 306--311.Google Scholar
- Christian Borgs, Michael Brautbar, Jennifer T. Chayes, and Brendan Lucier. 2012. Influence maximization in social networks: Towards an optimal algorithmic solution. arXiv preprint arXiv:1212.0884 (2012).Google Scholar
- J. J. Brown and P. H. Reingen. 1987. Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior. J. Consumer Res. 14 (1987), 350--362.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Centola. 2010. The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science 329, 5996 (2010), 1194--1197.Google Scholar
- Ning Chen. 2009. On the approximability of influence in social networks. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 23, 3 (2009), 1400--1415. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wei Chen, Tian Lin, Zihan Tan, Mingfei Zhao, and Xuren Zhou. 2016. Robust influence maximization. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD. ACM, 795--804. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wei Chen, Yajun Wang, and Siyu Yang. 2009. Efficient influence maximization in social networks. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD. ACM, 199--208. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wei Chen, Yifei Yuan, and Li Zhang. 2010. Scalable influence maximization in social networks under the linear threshold model. In Proceedings of the ICDM. IEEE, 88--97. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aaron Clauset, Cristopher Moore, and Mark EJ Newman. 2008. Hierarchical structure and the prediction of missing links in networks. Nature 453, 7191 (2008), 98--101.Google Scholar
- J. Coleman, E. Katz, and H. Menzel. 1957. The diffusion of an innovation among physicians. Sociometry 20 (1957), 253--270.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. G. Conley and C. R. Udry. 2010. Learning about a new technology: Pineapple in Ghana. Amer. Econ. Rev. 100, 1 (2010), 35--69.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Paul DiMaggio. 1986. Structural analysis of organizational fields: A blockmodel approach. Res. Organiz. Behav. 8 (1986), 335--370.Google Scholar
- P. Domingos and M. Richardson. 2001. Mining the network value of customers. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Goldenberg, B. Libai, and E. Muller. 2001. Using complex systems analysis to advance marketing theory development: Modeling heterogeneity effects on new product growth through stochastic cellular automata. Acad. Market. Sci. Rev. 9, 3 (2001), 1--18.Google Scholar
- Sanjeev Goyal and Michael Kearns. 2012. Competitive contagion in networks. In Proceedings of the STOC. 759--774. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mark Granovetter. 1978. Threshold models of collective behavior. Amer. J. Sociol. 83, 6 (1978), 1420--1443.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Xinran He and David Kempe. 2016. Robust influence maximization. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Paul W Holland, Kathryn Blackmond Laskey, and Samuel Leinhardt. 1983. Stochastic blockmodels: First steps. Soc. Netw. 5, 2 (1983), 109--137.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Matthew O. Jackson. 2008. Social and Economic Networks. Princeton University Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- David Kempe, Jon M. Kleinberg, and Éva Tardos. 2003. Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD. 137--146. Google ScholarDigital Library
- David Kempe, Jon M. Kleinberg, and Éva Tardos. 2005. Influential nodes in a diffusion model for social networks. In Proceedings of the ICALP. 1127--1138. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Lerman and R. Ghosh. 2010. Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks. In Proceedings of the ICWSM. 90--97.Google Scholar
- Jure Leskovec, Lada A. Adamic, and Bernardo A. Huberman. 2006. The dynamics of viral marketing. In Proceedings of the EC. 228--237. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Qiang Li, Wei Chen, Xiaoming Sun, and Jialin Zhang. 2017. Influence maximization with ϵ-almost submodular threshold functions. In Proceedings of the NIPS. 3804--3814. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brendan Lucier, Joel Oren, and Yaron Singer. 2015. Influence at scale: Distributed computation of complex contagion in networks. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD. ACM, 735--744. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vince Lyzinski, Minh Tang, Avanti Athreya, Youngser Park, and Carey E. Priebe. 2017. Community detection and classification in hierarchical stochastic blockmodels. IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering 4, 1 (2017), 13--26.Google ScholarCross Ref
- V. Mahajan, E. Muller, and F. M. Bass. 1990. New product diffusion models in marketing: A review and directions for research. J. Market. 54 (1990), 1--26.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Morris. 2000. Contagion. Rev. Econ. Studies 67, 1 (2000), 57--78.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Elchanan Mossel and Sébastien Roch. 2010. Submodularity of influence in social networks: From local to global. SIAM J. Comput. 39, 6 (2010), 2176--2188.Google ScholarDigital Library
- George L. Nemhauser, Laurence A. Wolsey, and Marshall L. Fisher. 1978. An analysis of approximations for maximizing submodular set functions. Math. Program. 14, 1 (1978), 265--294. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Richardson and P. Domingos. 2002. Mining knowledge-sharing sites for viral marketing. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD. 61--70. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniel M. Romero, Brendan Meeder, and Jon Kleinberg. 2011. Differences in the mechanics of information diffusion across topics: Idioms, political hashtags, and complex contagion on Twitter. In Proceedings of the WWW. ACM, 695--704. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1963503. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lior Seeman and Yaron Singer. 2013. Adaptive seeding in social networks. In Proceedings of the FOCS. IEEE, 459--468. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yaron Singer and Thibaut Horel. 2016. Maximization of approximately submodular functions. In Proceedings of the NIPS. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. J. Watts. 2002. A simple model of global cascades on random networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 9 (2002), 5766--5771. Retrieved from arXiv:http://www.pnas.org/content/99/9/5766.full.pdf+html.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Harrison C. White, Scott A. Boorman, and Ronald L. Breiger. 1976. Social structure from multiple networks. I. Blockmodels of roles and positions. Amer. J. Sociol. 81, 4 (1976), 730--780. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2777596.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Beyond Worst-case (In)approximability of Nonsubmodular Influence Maximization
Recommendations
Beyond Worst-Case (In)approximability of Nonsubmodular Influence Maximization
Web and Internet EconomicsAbstractWe consider the problem of maximizing the spread of influence in a social network by choosing a fixed number of initial seeds, formally referred to as the influence maximization problem. It admits a -factor approximation algorithm if the ...
Relations between Average-Case and Worst-Case Complexity
The consequences of the worst-case assumption NP=P are very well understood. On the other hand, we only know a few consequences of the analogous average-case assumption “NP is easy on average.” In this paper we establish several new results on the worst-...
On optimal approximability results for computing the strong metric dimension
The strong metric dimension of a graph was first introduced by Seb and Tannier (2004) as an alternative to the (weak) metric dimension of graphs previously introduced independently by Slater (1975) and by Harary and Melter (1976), and has since been ...
Comments