Abstract | ||
---|---|---|
Single source influence propagation based models have been widely studied, but a key challenge remains: How does a company utilize the minimum cost to select a seed set such that its influence spread can reach a desired threshold in competitive environment. One efficient way to overcome this challenge is to design an influence spread function with monotonicity and submodularity, which can provide a nice theoretical analysis of approximation ratio. In this paper, we first propose the Threshold Influence (TI) problem, i.e., selecting a seed set with minimum cost such that the influence spread reaches a given threshold η. Then we present two influence diffusion models named One-To-Many (OTM) and One-To-One (OTO) respectively. On one hand, for One-To-Many model, we prove that the influence spread function is monotone increasing as well as submodular and develop a greedy algorithm with a \((1+\ln (\frac {\eta }{\delta }))\) approximation ratio, where \(\delta >0\). In particular, the approximation ratio is (\(1+\ln (\eta )\)) if \(\eta \) is a positive integer. On the other hand, for One-To-One model, we demonstrate that the influence spread function is non-submodular. Besides, a heuristic framework is developed to solve this problem. Finally, we evaluate our algorithms by simulations on different scale networks. Through experiments, our algorithms outperform comparative methods. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
---|---|---|
2019 | 10.1007/s11280-018-0607-9 | World Wide Web |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
Competitive influence, Diffusion model, Seed selection, Submodularity | Integer,Monotonic function,Data mining,Discrete mathematics,Heuristic,Influence propagation,Computer science,Submodular set function,Greedy algorithm,Diffusion (business),Monotone polygon | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
22 | 6 | 1573-1413 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
1 | 0.36 | 13 |
Authors | ||
4 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
---|---|---|---|
Ruidong Yan | 1 | 10 | 3.89 |
Zhu Yuqing | 2 | 467 | 37.26 |
Deying Li | 3 | 5 | 0.77 |
Zilong Ye | 4 | 78 | 11.97 |