Graph Approximations to Geodesics on Metric Graphs

In machine learning, high-dimensional point clouds are often assumed to be sampled from a topological space of which the intrinsic dimension is significantly lower than the representation dimension. Proximity graphs, such as the Rips graph or kNN graph, are often used as an intermediate representation to learn or visualize topological and geometrical properties of this space. The key idea behind this approach is that distances on the graph preserve the geodesic distances on the unknown space well, and as such, can be used to infer local and global geometric patterns of this space. Prior results provide us with conditions under which these distances are well-preserved for geodesically convex, smooth, compact manifolds. Yet, proximity graphs are ideal representations for a much broader class of spaces, such as metric graphs, i.e., graphs embedded in the Euclidean space. It turns out-as proven in this paper-that these existing conditions cannot be straightforwardly adapted to these spaces. In this work, we provide novel, flexible, and insightful characteristics and results for topological pattern recognition of metric graphs to bridge this gap.

[1]  Larry A. Wasserman,et al.  Statistical analysis of metric graph reconstruction , 2013, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[2]  Sofiane Abbar,et al.  RoadRunner: improving the precision of road network inference from GPS trajectories , 2018, SIGSPATIAL/GIS.

[3]  Heng Tao Shen,et al.  Principal Component Analysis , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[4]  Edwin R. Hancock,et al.  A Unified Neighbor Reconstruction Method for Embeddings , 2018, 2018 24th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR).

[5]  Gunnar E. Carlsson,et al.  Topology and data , 2009 .

[6]  Alexandros Nanopoulos,et al.  Nearest neighbors in high-dimensional data: the emergence and influence of hubs , 2009, ICML '09.

[7]  Kilian Q. Weinberger,et al.  Unsupervised Learning of Image Manifolds by Semidefinite Programming , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2004. CVPR 2004..

[8]  Li Yang,et al.  Building Connected Neighborhood Graphs for Locally Linear Embedding , 2006, 18th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR'06).

[9]  Charu C. Aggarwal,et al.  On the Surprising Behavior of Distance Metrics in High Dimensional Spaces , 2001, ICDT.

[10]  Axel Wismüller,et al.  The Exploration Machine - A Novel Method for Data Visualization , 2009, WSOM.

[11]  Steve Oudot,et al.  Persistence Theory - From Quiver Representations to Data Analysis , 2015, Mathematical surveys and monographs.

[12]  Yvan Saeys,et al.  A comparison of single-cell trajectory inference methods , 2019, Nature Biotechnology.

[13]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  A global geometric framework for nonlinear dimensionality reduction. , 2000, Science.

[14]  Tijl De Bie,et al.  The Boundary Coefficient: a Vertex Measure for Visualizing and Finding Structure in Weighted Graphs , 2019 .

[15]  Michel Verleysen,et al.  Locally Linear Embedding versus Isotop , 2003, ESANN.

[16]  Mikhail Belkin,et al.  Laplacian Eigenmaps and Spectral Techniques for Embedding and Clustering , 2001, NIPS.

[17]  Hongyuan Zha,et al.  Principal Manifolds and Nonlinear Dimension Reduction via Local Tangent Space Alignment , 2002, ArXiv.

[18]  Leonidas J. Guibas,et al.  Metric graph reconstruction from noisy data , 2011, SoCG '11.

[19]  Yvan Saeys,et al.  Local Topological Data Analysis to Uncover the Global Structure of Data Approaching Graph-Structured Topologies , 2018, ECML/PKDD.