Counting Triangles under Updates in Worst-Case Optimal Time

We consider the problem of incrementally maintaining the triangle count query under single-tuple updates to the input relations. We introduce an approach that exhibits a space-time tradeoff such that the space-time product is quadratic in the size of the input database and the update time can be as low as the square root of this size. This lowest update time is worst-case optimal conditioned on the Online Matrix-Vector Multiplication conjecture. The classical and factorized incremental view maintenance approaches are recovered as special cases of our approach within the space-time tradeoff. In particular, they require linear-time update maintenance, which is suboptimal. Our approach also recovers the worst-case optimal time complexity for computing the triangle count in the non-incremental setting.

[1]  Nicole Schweikardt,et al.  Answering Conjunctive Queries under Updates , 2017, PODS.

[2]  Thomas Zeume.  The Dynamic Descriptive Complexity of k-Clique , 2014, MFCS.

[3]  Thomas Schwentick,et al.  Dynamic complexity: recent updates , 2016, SIGL.

[4]  Amir Shaikhha,et al.  DBToaster: higher-order delta processing for dynamic, frequently fresh views , 2012, The VLDB Journal.

[5]  Hung Q. Ngo,et al.  Worst-Case Optimal Join Algorithms: Techniques, Results, and Open Problems , 2018, PODS.

[6]  Christian Sohler,et al.  Counting triangles in data streams , 2006, PODS.

[7]  P Barcelo,et al.  Counting Triangles under Updates in Worst-Case Optimal Time , 2019 .

[8]  Rada Chirkova,et al.  Materialized Views , 2012, Found. Trends Databases.

[9]  Milos Nikolic,et al.  DBToaster: Higher-order Delta Processing for Dynamic, Frequently Fresh Views , 2012, Proc. VLDB Endow..

[10]  Dániel Marx,et al.  Constraint solving via fractional edge covers , 2006, SODA '06.

[11]  Christoph Koch,et al.  Incremental query evaluation in a ring of databases , 2010, PODS.

[12]  Dan Olteanu,et al.  Incremental View Maintenance with Triple Lock Factorization Benefits , 2017, SIGMOD Conference.

[13]  Ziv Bar-Yossef,et al.  Reductions in streaming algorithms, with an application to counting triangles in graphs , 2002, SODA '02.

[14]  Noga Alon,et al.  Finding and counting given length cycles , 1997, Algorithmica.

[15]  Dan Suciu,et al.  Algorithmic Aspects of Parallel Data Processing , 2018, Found. Trends Databases.

[16]  Graham Cormode,et al.  A second look at counting triangles in graph streams (corrected) , 2017, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Stijn Vansummeren,et al.  The Dynamic Yannakakis Algorithm: Compact and Efficient Query Processing Under Updates , 2017, SIGMOD Conference.

[18]  V. V. Williams.  ON SOME FINE-GRAINED QUESTIONS IN ALGORITHMS AND COMPLEXITY , 2019, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM 2018).

[19]  Atri Rudra,et al.  Skew strikes back: new developments in the theory of join algorithms , 2013, SGMD.

[20]  Monika Henzinger,et al.  Unifying and Strengthening Hardness for Dynamic Problems via the Online Matrix-Vector Multiplication Conjecture , 2015, STOC.

[21]  Nicole Schweikardt,et al.  Answering UCQs under updates and in the presence of integrity constraints , 2017, ICDT.

[22]  Atri Rudra,et al.  FAQ: Questions Asked Frequently , 2015, PODS.

[23]  Dan Suciu,et al.  The dichotomy of conjunctive queries on probabilistic structures , 2006, PODS.

[24]  Sofya Vorotnikova,et al.  Better Algorithms for Counting Triangles in Data Streams , 2016, PODS.

[25]  Dana Ron,et al.  Approximately Counting Triangles in Sublinear Time , 2015, 2015 IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[26]  Mohammad Ghodsi,et al.  New Streaming Algorithms for Counting Triangles in Graphs , 2005, COCOON.