1 / 50

Mining Tree-Query Associations in a Graph

Mining Tree-Query Associations in a Graph. Bart Goethals University of Antwerp, Belgium Eveline Hoekx Jan Van den Bussche Hasselt University, Belgium. Graph Data. A (directed) graph over a set of nodes N is a set G of edges: ordered pairs  i  j  with i  j  N.

rhian
Download Presentation

Mining Tree-Query Associations in a Graph

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Mining Tree-Query Associations in a Graph Bart Goethals University of Antwerp, Belgium Eveline Hoekx Jan Van den Bussche Hasselt University, Belgium

  2. Graph Data A (directed) graph over a set of nodes N is a set G of edges: ordered pairs ij with ij  N. Snapshot of a graph representing the complete metabolic pathway of a human.

  3. Graph Mining Transactional category • dataset: set of many small graphs (transactions) • frequency: transactions in which the pattern occurs (at least once) • ILP:Warmr [AGM, FSG, TreeMiner, gSpan, FFSM] Single graph category • dataset: single large graph • frequency: copies of the pattern in the large graph [Subdue, Vanetik-Gudes-Shimony, SEuS, SiGraM, Jeh-Widom] Focus on pattern mining, few work on association rule mining!

  4. Our work • Single graph category • Pattern + association rule mining • Patterns with: • Existential nodes • Parameters • Occurrence of the pattern in G is any homomorphism from the pattern in G. • So far only considered in the ILP (transactional) setting

  5. Example of a pattern frequencyx z5z G z8 G zx G

  6. Patterns are conjunctive queries. select distinct G3.to as x from G G1, G G2, G G3 where G1.from=5 and G1.to=G2.from and G1.to=G3.from and G2.to=8 frequencyx z5z G z8 G zx G

  7. Example of an Association Rule

  8. Features of the presented algorithms • Pattern mining phase + association mining phase • Restriction to trees => efficient algorithms • Equivalence checking • Apply theory of conjunctive database queries • Database oriented implementation

  9. Outline rest of talk • Formal problem definition • Algorithms: • Pattern Mining • Overall approach • Outer loop: incremental • Inner loop: levelwise • Equivalence checking • Association Rule Mining • Result management • Experimental results • Future work

  10. Formal definition of a tree pattern. A tree pattern is a tree P whose nodes are called variables, and: • some variables marked as existential • some variables are parameters(labeled with a constant) • remaining variables are called distinguished

  11. Formal definition of a tree query. A tree queryQ is a pair (H,P) where: • P is a tree pattern, the body of Q • H is a tuple of distinguished variables and parameters of P. All distinguished variables of P must appear at least once in H, the head of Q

  12. Formal definition of a matching A matching of a pattern P in a graph G is a homomorphism h: P  G, with hza, for parameters labeled a.

  13. Example: Matching

  14. Example: Matching

  15. Example: Matching

  16. Example: Matching

  17. Example: Matching

  18. Example: Matching

  19. Example: Matching

  20. Formal definition of frequency The frequency of Q in G is #answers in the answer set. We define the answer set of Q in G as follows: Q(G):={f(H)|f is a matching of P in G

  21. Example: Matching   frequency 

  22. Problem statement 1: Tree query mining Given a graph G and a threshold k, find all tree queries that have frequency at least k in G, those queries are called frequent.

  23. Formal definition of an association rule An association rule (AR) is of the form Q1 Q2 with Q1 and Q2 tree queries. The AR is legal if Q2 Q1. The confidence of the AR in a graph G is defined as the frequency of Q2 divided by the frequency of Q1.

  24. Problem statement 2: Association rule mining • Input: a graph G, minsup, a tree query Qleft frequent in G, minconf • Output: all tree queries Q such that QleftQ is a legal and confident association rule in G.

  25. Outline rest of talk • Formal problem definition • Algorithms: • Pattern Mining • Overall approach • Outer loop: incremental • Inner loop: levelwise • Equivalence checking • Association Rule Mining • Result management • Experimental results • Future work

  26. Pattern Mining Algorithm x1 x2 x4 x3 x        x2 x2 x1 x1 Outer loop: Generate,incrementally, all possible trees of increasing sizes. Avoid generation of isomorphic trees. Inner loop: For each newly generated tree, generate all queries based on that tree, and test their frequency. ...

  27. Outer loop • It is well known how to efficiently generate all trees uniquely up to isomorphism • Based on canonical form of trees. • [Scions, Li-Ruskey, Zaki, Chi-Young-Muntz]

  28. Inner loop: Levelwise approach • A query Q is characterized by • Q set of existential nodes • Q set of parameters • Labeling Qof the parameters by constants. • Qspecializes Q if  , and  agrees with  on . • If Qspecializes Q then freqQ freqQ • Most general query: T = (, , )

  29. Inner loop: Candidate generation • CanTab is a candidate query FreqTabis a frequent query • Q’=’’ is aparent of Q= if either: • ’ and  has precisely one more node than ’, or • ’ and  has precisely one more node than ’ • Join Lemma: Each candidacy table can be computed by taking the natural join of its parent frequency tables.

  30. Inner loop: Frequency counting • Each candidacy table can be computed by a single SQL query. (ref. Join lemma). • Suppose: Gfromto table in the database, then each frequency table can be computed with a single SQL query. •  • formulate in SQL and count •  • formulate  in SQLE • natural join of E with CanTab • group by  • count each group

  31. Inner loop: Example x x x x x

  32. Inner loop: Example x x x x x • Join expression: • CanTab{x}{x,x} = FreqTabxx⋈FreqTabxx ⋈FreqTabxx

  33. Inner loop: Example x x x x x • SQL expression E for x select distinct G1.from as x1, G2.to as x3, G3.to as x4 from G G1, G G2, G G3 where G1.to = G2.from and G3.from = G2.from

  34. Inner loop: Example x x x x x • SQL expression for filling the frequency table: select distinct E.x1, E.x3, count(E.x4) from E, CanTab{x2}{x1,x3} as CT where E.x1 = CT.x1 and E.x3 = CT.x3 group by E.x1, E.x3 having count(E.x4) >= k

  35. Equivalent queries Queries Q and Q are equivalent if same answer sets on all graphs G (up to renaming of the distinguished variables) • 2 cases of equivalent queries: • Q1 has fewer nodes than Q2 • Q1 and Q2 have the same number of nodes

  36. Equivalence theorem Two queries are equivalent if and only if there are containment mappings between them in both directions. A containment mapping from Q to Q is a h: QQ that maps distinguished variables ofQ one-to-one to distinguished variables of Q, and maps parameters of Q to parameters of Q, preserving labels

  37. Case : Q fewer nodes than Q2 Redundancy lemma: Let Q be a tree query without selected nodes. Then Q has a redundancy if and only if it contains a subtree C in the form of a linear chain of  nodes (possibly just a single node), such that the parent of C has another subtree that is at least as deep asC. Redundant subtree

  38. Case : Q and Q same number of nodes • Q and Q must be isomorphic. • Canonical form of queries: refine the canonical ordering of the underlying unlabeled tree, taking into account node labels.

  39. Association Mining Algorithm • Input: a graph G, minsup, a tree query Qleft frequent in G, minconf • Output: all tree queries Q such that QleftQ is a legal and confident association rule in G.

  40. Containment mappings • For each tree query, generate all containment mappings from Qleft to Q, ignoring parameter assignments.

  41. Instantiations • For each containment mapping, generate all parameter assignments such that Qleft Q is frequent and confident.

  42. Equivalent Association rules • Equivalence checking of association rules is as hard as general graph isomorphism testing.

  43. Outline rest of talk • Result management • Experimental results • Future work

  44. Result management • Output: frequency tables stored in a relational database. • Browser

  45. Experimental results: Real-life datasets • Food webnodesedges frequency = 176

  46. Experimental results: Real-life datasets • Food webnodesedges confidence = 11%

  47. Experimental results: Performance • Fully implemented on top of IBM DB2 • Preliminary performance results: • pattern mining algorithm: • adequate performance • huge number of patterns • constant overhead per discovered pattern • association mining algorithm: • very fast • constant overhead per discovered rule

  48. Future work • Applications: scientific data mining • Loosen restriction to trees

  49. References • Bart Goethals, Eveline Hoekx and Jan Van den Bussche, Mining Tree Queries in a Graph, in Proceedings of the eleventh ACM SIGKDD International conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, p 61-69, ACM Press 2005 • Eveline Hoekx and Jan Van den Bussche, Mining for Tree-Query Associations in a Graph, to appear in Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2006)

More Related