A reversed node ranking approach for influence maximization in social networks

Influence maximization, i.e. to maximize the influence spread in a social network by finding a group of influential nodes as small as possible, has been studied widely in recent years. Many methods have been developed based on either explicit Monte Carlo simulation or scoring systems, among which the former perform well yet are very time-consuming while the latter ones are efficient but sensitive to different spreading models. In this paper, we propose a novel influence maximization algorithm in social networks, named Reversed Node Ranking (RNR). It exploits the reversed rank information of a node and the effects of its neighbours upon this node to estimate its influence power, and then iteratively selects the top node as a seed node once the ranking reaches stable. Besides, we also present two optimization strategies to tackle the rich-club phenomenon. Experiments on both Independent Cascade (IC) model and Weighted Cascade (WC) model show that our proposed RNR method exhibits excellent performance and outperforms other state-of-the-arts. As a by-product, our work also reveals that the IC model is more sensitive to the rich-club phenomenon than the WC model.

[1]  Sainyam Galhotra,et al.  Debunking the Myths of Influence Maximization: An In-Depth Benchmarking Study , 2017, SIGMOD Conference.

[2]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  Detecting rich-club ordering in complex networks , 2006, physics/0602134.

[3]  Dong Liu,et al.  A Fast and Efficient Algorithm for Mining Top-k Nodes in Complex Networks , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[4]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  Graph evolution: Densification and shrinking diameters , 2006, TKDD.

[5]  Weijia Jia,et al.  Influence analysis in social networks: A survey , 2018, J. Netw. Comput. Appl..

[6]  Xueqi Cheng,et al.  StaticGreedy: solving the scalability-accuracy dilemma in influence maximization , 2012, CIKM.

[7]  Ian T. Foster,et al.  Mapping the Gnutella Network: Properties of Large-Scale Peer-to-Peer Systems and Implications for System Design , 2002, ArXiv.

[8]  Dongyun Yi,et al.  Effective identification of multiple influential spreaders by DegreePunishment , 2016 .

[9]  Leonard M. Freeman,et al.  A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness , 1977 .

[10]  Laks V. S. Lakshmanan,et al.  CELF++: optimizing the greedy algorithm for influence maximization in social networks , 2011, WWW.

[11]  Andreas Krause,et al.  Cost-effective outbreak detection in networks , 2007, KDD '07.

[12]  Wei Chen,et al.  Efficient influence maximization in social networks , 2009, KDD.

[13]  Christiane Fellbaum,et al.  Book Reviews: WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database , 1999, CL.

[14]  Claudio Castellano,et al.  Fundamental difference between superblockers and superspreaders in networks , 2016, Physical review. E.

[15]  Rajeev Motwani,et al.  The PageRank Citation Ranking : Bringing Order to the Web , 1999, WWW 1999.

[16]  Matthew Richardson,et al.  Mining the network value of customers , 2001, KDD '01.

[17]  Alex Bavelas,et al.  Communication Patterns in Task‐Oriented Groups , 1950 .

[18]  Shi Zhou,et al.  The rich-club phenomenon in the Internet topology , 2003, IEEE Communications Letters.

[19]  Éva Tardos,et al.  Maximizing the Spread of Influence through a Social Network , 2015, Theory Comput..

[20]  Wei Chen,et al.  Scalable influence maximization for prevalent viral marketing in large-scale social networks , 2010, KDD.

[21]  Myungsik Yoo,et al.  Probability-Based Multi-hop Diffusion Method for Influence Maximization in Social Networks , 2017, Wirel. Pers. Commun..

[22]  Matthew Richardson,et al.  Mining knowledge-sharing sites for viral marketing , 2002, KDD.

[23]  M. Newman,et al.  Finding community structure in networks using the eigenvectors of matrices. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.