Combinatorial model and bounds for target set selection

The adoption of everyday decisions in public affairs, fashion, movie-going, and consumer behavior is now thoroughly believed to migrate in a population through an influential network. The same diffusion process when being imitated by intention is called viral marketing. This process can be modeled by a (directed) graph G=(V,E) with a threshold t(v) for every vertex v?V, where v becomes active once at least t(v) of its (in-)neighbors are already active. A Perfect Target Set is a set of vertices whose activation will eventually activate the entire graph, and the Perfect Target Set Selection Problem (PTSS) asks for the minimum such initial set. It is known (Chen (2008) 6) that PTSS is hard to approximate, even for some special cases such as bounded-degree graphs, or majority thresholds.We propose a combinatorial model for this dynamic activation process, and use it to represent PTSS and its variants by linear integer programs. This allows one to use standard integer programming solvers for solving small-size PTSS instances. We also show combinatorial lower and upper bounds on the size of the minimum Perfect Target Set. Our upper bound implies that there are always Perfect Target Sets of size at most |V|/2 and 2|V|/3 under majority and strict majority thresholds, respectively, both in directed and undirected graphs. This improves the bounds of 0.727|V| and 0.7732|V| found recently by Chang and Lyuu (2010) 5 for majority and strict majority thresholds in directed graphs, and matches their bound under majority thresholds in undirected graphs. Furthermore, our proof is much simpler, and we observe that some of these bounds are tight. One interesting and perhaps surprising implication of our lower bound for undirected graphs, is that it is easy to get a constant factor approximation for PTSS for “relatively balanced” graphs (e.g., bounded-degree graphs, nearly regular graphs) with a “more than majority” threshold (that is, t(v)=??deg(v), for every v?V and some constant ?>1/2), whereas no polylogarithmic approximation exists for “more than majority” graphs.

[1]  J. Spencer.  Ten lectures on the probabilistic method , 1987 .

[2]  David Peleg,et al.  Local majorities, coalitions and monopolies in graphs: a review , 2002, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[3]  Nicola Santoro,et al.  Optimal irreversible dynamos in chordal rings , 2001, Discret. Appl. Math..

[4]  Vijay V. Vazirani,et al.  Approximation Algorithms , 2001, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[5]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[6]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Halting viruses in scale-free networks. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[7]  Paola Flocchini,et al.  On time versus size for monotone dynamic monopolies in regular topologies , 2000, SIROCCO.

[8]  Fabrizio Luccio,et al.  Irreversible Dynamos in Butterflies , 1999, Colloquium on Structural Information & Communication Complexity.

[9]  P. Lazarsfeld,et al.  6. Katz, E. Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications , 1956 .

[10]  David Peleg,et al.  Size Bounds for Dynamic Monopolies , 1998, Discret. Appl. Math..

[11]  Ching-Lueh Chang,et al.  Spreading messages , 2008, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[12]  Ilan Newman,et al.  An exact almost optimal algorithm for target set selection in social networks , 2009, EC '09.

[13]  Ning Chen,et al.  On the approximability of influence in social networks , 2008, SODA '08.

[14]  Ching-Lueh Chang,et al.  Bounding the Number of Tolerable Faults in Majority-Based Systems , 2010, CIAC.

[15]  P. Lazarsfeld,et al.  Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications , 1956 .

[16]  Luis E. Ortiz,et al.  Algorithms for Interdependent Security Games , 2003, NIPS.

[17]  D. Wilson.  Levels of selection: An alternative to individualism in biology and the human sciences , 1989 .

[18]  Reuven Bar-Yehuda,et al.  A Linear-Time Approximation Algorithm for the Weighted Vertex Cover Problem , 1981, J. Algorithms.

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

[20]  Eli Berger.  Dynamic Monopolies of Constant Size , 2001, J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B.

[21]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  Epidemic spreading in scale-free networks. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[22]  Ajay Mehra.  The Development of Social Network Analysis: A Study in the Sociology of Science , 2005 .

[23]  Rafael T. Mikolajczyk,et al.  Collecting social contact data in the context of disease transmission: Prospective and retrospective study designs , 2008, Soc. Networks.

[24]  Redaktionen.  THE REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES , 1960 .

[25]  Sharon L. Milgram,et al.  The Small World Problem , 1967 .

[26]  Éva Tardos,et al.  Influential Nodes in a Diffusion Model for Social Networks , 2005, ICALP.

[27]  Elchanan Mossel,et al.  Submodularity of Influence in Social Networks: From Local to Global , 2010, SIAM J. Comput..