Fixing two weaknesses of the Spectral Method

We discuss two intrinsic weaknesses of the spectral graph partitioning method, both of which have practical consequences. The first is that spectral embeddings tend to hide the best cuts from the commonly used hyperplane rounding method. Rather than cleaning up the resulting sub-optimal cuts with local search, we recommend the adoption of flow-based rounding. The second weakness is that for many "power law" graphs, the spectral method produces cuts that are highly unbalanced, thus decreasing the usefulness of the method for visualization (see figure 4(b)) or as a basis for divide-and-conquer algorithms. These balance problems, which occur even though the spectral method's quotient-style objective function does encourage balance, can be fixed with a stricter balance constraint that turns the spectral mathematical program into an SDP that can be solved for million-node graphs by a method of Burer and Monteiro.

[1]  Peter G. Doyle,et al.  Random Walks and Electric Networks: REFERENCES , 1987 .

[2]  Christoph Helmberg,et al.  Numerical evaluation of SBmethod , 2003, Math. Program..

[3]  D. Spielman,et al.  Spectral partitioning works: planar graphs and finite element meshes , 1996, Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science.

[4]  Charles M. Fiduccia,et al.  A linear-time heuristic for improving network partitions , 1988, 25 years of DAC.

[5]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  Normalized cuts and image segmentation , 1997, Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[6]  Andrew V. Goldberg,et al.  On Implementing the Push—Relabel Method for the Maximum Flow Problem , 1997, Algorithmica.

[7]  Renato D. C. Monteiro,et al.  A nonlinear programming algorithm for solving semidefinite programs via low-rank factorization , 2003, Math. Program..

[8]  David P. Williamson,et al.  Improved approximation algorithms for maximum cut and satisfiability problems using semidefinite programming , 1995, JACM.

[9]  Satish Rao,et al.  Expander flows, geometric embeddings and graph partitioning , 2004, STOC '04.

[10]  Satish Rao,et al.  A Flow-Based Method for Improving the Expansion or Conductance of Graph Cuts , 2004, IPCO.

[11]  F. Chung,et al.  The average distances in random graphs with given expected degrees , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  Bruce Hendrickson,et al.  A Multi-Level Algorithm For Partitioning Graphs , 1995, Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM SC95 Conference.

[13]  Noga Alon,et al.  lambda1, Isoperimetric inequalities for graphs, and superconcentrators , 1985, J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B.

[14]  Renato D. C. Monteiro,et al.  Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1007/s10107-004-0564-1 , 2004 .

[15]  A. Hoffman,et al.  Lower bounds for the partitioning of graphs , 1973 .

[16]  Stephen Guattery,et al.  On the Quality of Spectral Separators , 1998, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl..