Graph edit distance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Template:Short description

At first glance, the GED (graph edit distance) may appear to be 7, removing 3 edges, adding the yellow vertex, and adding edges between it and the 3 other vertices. However, the optimal set of operations would be to remove the edge between 2 colors of choice (for example, green and blue), change the third (red) to yellow, add a vertex of the now missing color (red), and connect it to the newly yellow vertex, for a GED of 4.

In mathematics and computer science, graph edit distance (GED) is a measure of similarity (or dissimilarity) between two graphs. The concept of graph edit distance was first formalized mathematically by Alberto Sanfeliu and King-Sun Fu in 1983.[1] A major application of graph edit distance is in inexact graph matching, such as error-tolerant pattern recognition in machine learning.[2]

The graph edit distance between two graphs is related to the string edit distance between strings. With the interpretation of strings as connected, directed acyclic graphs of maximum degree one, classical definitions of edit distance such as Levenshtein distance,[3][4] Hamming distance[5] and Jaro–Winkler distance may be interpreted as graph edit distances between suitably constrained graphs. Likewise, graph edit distance is also a generalization of tree edit distance between rooted trees.[6][7][8][9][10]

Formal definitions and properties

The mathematical definition of graph edit distance is dependent upon the definitions of the graphs over which it is defined, i.e. whether and how the vertices and edges of the graph are labeled and whether the edges are directed. Generally, given a set of graph edit operations (also known as elementary graph operations), the graph edit distance between two graphs g1 and g2, written as GED(g1,g2) can be defined as

GED(g1,g2)=min(e1,...,ek)∈𝒫(g1,g2)∑i=1kc(ei)

where 𝒫(g1,g2) denotes the set of edit paths transforming g1 into (a graph isomorphic to) g2 and c(e)≥0 is the cost of each graph edit operation e.

The set of elementary graph edit operators typically includes:

vertex insertion to introduce a single new labeled vertex to a graph.
vertex deletion to remove a single (often disconnected) vertex from a graph.
vertex substitution to change the label (or color) of a given vertex.
edge insertion to introduce a new colored edge between a pair of vertices.
edge deletion to remove a single edge between a pair of vertices.
edge substitution to change the label (or color) of a given edge.

Additional, but less common operators, include operations such as edge splitting that introduces a new vertex into an edge (also creating a new edge), and edge contraction that eliminates vertices of degree two between edges (of the same color). Although such complex edit operators can be defined in terms of more elementary transformations, their use allows finer parameterization of the cost function c when the operator is cheaper than the sum of its constituents.

A deep analysis of the elementary graph edit operators is presented in [11][12][13]

And some methods have been presented to automatically deduce these elementary graph edit operators.[14][15][16][17][18] And some algorithms learn these costs online:[19]

Applications

Graph edit distance finds applications in handwriting recognition,[20] fingerprint recognition[21] and cheminformatics.[22]

Algorithms and complexity

Exact algorithms for computing the graph edit distance between a pair of graphs typically transform the problem into one of finding the minimum cost edit path between the two graphs. The computation of the optimal edit path is cast as a pathfinding search or shortest path problem, often implemented as an A* search algorithm.

In addition to exact algorithms, a number of efficient approximation algorithms are also known. Most of them have cubic computational time [23][24] [25] [26]

[27] however, the runtime of at least one algorithm is linear in the number of nodes while still being cubic in the node degree.[28]

Despite the above algorithms sometimes working well in practice, in general the problem of computing graph edit distance is NP-hard (for a proof that's available online, see Section 2 of Zeng et al.), and is even hard to approximate (formally, it is APX-hard[29]).

Tree Edit Distance

Tree Edit Distance (TED) represents the minimum cost of transforming one tree into another using three operations: insertion, deletion, and replacement. The first polynomial-time TED algorithm was proposed by Tai in 1979[30]. In 1989, Kaizhong Zhang and Dennis Shasha proposed the most well-known TED algorithm[31], which introduced Dynamic Programming (DP) techniques to solve TED and has a worst-case time complexity of O(n4). This method employs a series of DP tables, where each table computes the edit distance between a subpart of the first input tree and a subpart of the second input tree. Since then, substantial research efforts[32][33][34] have focused on improving its sequential time complexity, and it has been proven that O(n3) is the lowest theoretical bound[35].

Parallelization

Despite these sequential improvements, TED remains computationally expensive for large trees, and its parallelization is highly non-trivial[36]. Specifically, TED computation involves both intra-table and inter-table data dependencies: entries within a DP table depend on previously computed entries, while the computation of each DP table depends on results from other tables[10]. These intricate dependencies hinder parallel execution. Moreover, the severe workload imbalance across DP tables further complicates scheduling and reduces parallel resource utilization.

X-TED[10] is a massively parallel framework for TED computation that addresses these structural challenges. It employs a new preprocessing algorithm to efficiently determine dependency relationships among DP tables by analyzing only the tree structures. Based on this dependency information, X-TED groups independent DP tables into batches and processes them in parallel. To handle tables of different sizes, X-TED further adopts a dynamic parallelization strategy that allocates different levels of parallel resources according to each table’s size. Extensive experiments on multicore CPUs and GPUs using real-world and synthetic trees demonstrate the effectiveness of X-TED for large-scale TED computation[10].


References

Page Template:Reflist/styles.css has no content.

  1. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Sanfeliu, Alberto; Fu, King-Sun (1983). "A distance measure between attributed relational graphs for pattern recognition". IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 13 (3): 353–363. doi:10.1109/TSMC.1983.6313167. S2CID 1087693.
  2. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Gao, Xinbo; Xiao, Bing; Tao, Dacheng; Li, Xuelong (2010). "A survey of graph edit distance". Pattern Analysis and Applications. 13: 113–129. doi:10.1007/s10044-008-0141-y.
  3. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Влади́мир И. Левенштейн (1965). Двоичные коды с исправлением выпадений, вставок и замещений символов [Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals]. Доклады Академий Наук СССР (in русский). 163 (4): 845–848.
  4. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Levenshtein, Vladimir I. (February 1966). "Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals". Soviet Physics Doklady. 10 (8): 707–710. Bibcode:1966SPhD...10..707L.
  5. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Hamming, Richard W. (1950). "Error detecting and error correcting codes" (PDF). Bell System Technical Journal. 29 (2): 147–160. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1950.tb00463.x. hdl:10945/46756. MR 0035935. S2CID 61141773. Archived from the original on 2006-05-25.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  6. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Shasha, D; Zhang, K (1989). "Simple fast algorithms for the editing distance between trees and related problems". SIAM J. Comput. 18 (6): 1245–1262. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.460.5601. doi:10.1137/0218082. S2CID 10970317.
  7. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Zhang, K (1996). "A constrained edit distance between unordered labeled trees". Algorithmica. 15 (3): 205–222. doi:10.1007/BF01975866. S2CID 20043881.
  8. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Bille, P (2005). "A survey on tree edit distance and related problems". Theor. Comput. Sci. 337 (1–3): 22–34. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.100.2577. doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2004.12.030.
  9. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Demaine, Erik D.; Mozes, Shay; Rossman, Benjamin; Weimann, Oren (2010). "An optimal decomposition algorithm for tree edit distance". ACM Transactions on Algorithms. 6 (1): A2. arXiv:cs/0604037. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.163.6937. doi:10.1145/1644015.1644017. MR 2654906. S2CID 7878119.
  10. ^ a b c d Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Fan, Dayi; Lee, Rubao; Zhang, Xiaodong (2024). "X-TED: Massive Parallelization of Tree Edit Distance" (PDF). Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment. 17 (7): 1683–1696. doi:10.14778/3654621.3654634.
  11. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Serratosa, Francesc (2021). Redefining the Graph Edit Distance. S. N. Computer Science, pp: 2-438.
  12. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Serratosa, Francesc (2019). Graph edit distance: Restrictions to be a metric. Pattern Recognition, 90, pp: 250-256.
  13. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Serratosa, Francesc; Cortés, Xavier (2015). Graph Edit Distance: moving from global to local structure to solve the graph-matching problem. Pattern Recognition Letters, 65, pp: 204-210.
  14. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Santacruz, Pep; Serratosa, Francesc (2020). Learning the graph edit costs based on a learning model applied to sub-optimal graph matching. Neural Processing Letters, 51, pp: 881–904.
  15. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Algabli, Shaima; Serratosa, Francesc (2018). Embedding the node-to-node mappings to learn the Graph edit distance parameters. Pattern Recognition Letters, 112, pp: 353-360.
  16. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Xavier, Cortés; Serratosa, Francesc (2016). Learning Graph Matching Substitution Weights based on the Ground Truth Node Correspondence. International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 30(2), pp: 1650005 [22 pages].
  17. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Xavier, Cortés; Serratosa, Francesc (2015). Learning Graph-Matching Edit-Costs based on the Optimality of the Oracle's Node Correspondences. Pattern Recognition Letters, 56, pp: 22 - 29.
  18. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Conte, Donatello; Serratosa, Francesc (2020). Interactive Online Learning for Graph Matching using Active Strategies. Knowledge Based Systems, 105, pp: 106275.
  19. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Rica, Elena; Álvarez, Susana; Serratosa, Francesc (2021). On-line learning the graph edit distance costs. Pattern Recognition Letters, 146, pp: 52-62.
  20. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Fischer, Andreas; Suen, Ching Y.; Frinken, Volkmar; Riesen, Kaspar; Bunke, Horst (2013), "A Fast Matching Algorithm for Graph-Based Handwriting Recognition", Graph-Based Representations in Pattern Recognition, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7877, pp. 194–203, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38221-5_21, ISBN 978-3-642-38220-8
  21. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Neuhaus, Michel; Bunke, Horst (2005), "A Graph Matching Based Approach to Fingerprint Classification using Directional Variance", Audio- and Video-Based Biometric Person Authentication, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3546, pp. 191–200, doi:10.1007/11527923_20, ISBN 978-3-540-27887-0
  22. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Birchall, Kristian; Gillet, Valerie J.; Harper, Gavin; Pickett, Stephen D. (Jan 2006). "Training Similarity Measures for Specific Activities: Application to Reduced Graphs". Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. 46 (2): 557–586. doi:10.1021/ci050465e. PMID 16562986.
  23. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Neuhaus, Michel; Bunke, Horst (Nov 2007). Bridging the Gap between Graph Edit Distance and Kernel Machines. Machine Perception and Artificial Intelligence. Vol. 68. World Scientific. ISBN 978-9812708175.
  24. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Riesen, Kaspar (Feb 2016). Structural Pattern Recognition with Graph Edit Distance: Approximation Algorithms and Applications. Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Springer. ISBN 978-3319272511.
  25. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Serratosa, Francesc (2014). Fast Computation of Bipartite Graph Matching. Pattern Recognition Letters, 45, pp: 244 - 250.
  26. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Serratosa, Francesc (2015). Speeding up Fast Bipartite Graph Matching through a new cost matrix. International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 29 (2), 1550010, [17 pages].
  27. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Serratosa, Francesc (2015). Computation of Graph Edit Distance: Reasoning about Optimality and Speed-up. Image and Vision Computing, 40, pp: 38-48.
  28. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Santacruz, Pep; Serratosa, Francesc (2018). Error-tolerant graph matching in linear computational cost using an initial small partial matching. Pattern Recognition Letters.
  29. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Lin, Chih-Long (1994-08-25). "Hardness of approximating graph transformation problem". In Du, Ding-Zhu; Zhang, Xiang-Sun (eds.). Algorithms and Computation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 834. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. pp. 74–82. doi:10.1007/3-540-58325-4_168. ISBN 9783540583257.
  30. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Tai, Kuo-Chung (1979). "The Tree-to-Tree Correction Problem". Journal of the ACM. 26 (3): 422–433. doi:10.1145/322139.322143.
  31. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Zhang, Kaizhong; Shasha, Dennis (1989). "Simple Fast Algorithms for the Editing Distance between Trees and Related Problems". SIAM Journal on Computing. 18 (6): 1245–1262. doi:10.1137/0218082.
  32. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Klein, Philip N. (1998). "Computing the Edit-Distance between Unrooted Ordered Trees". Proceedings of the 6th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA '98). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag: 91–102.
  33. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Demaine, Erik D.; Mozes, Shay; Rossman, Benjamin; Weimann, Oren (2010). "An Optimal Decomposition Algorithm for Tree Edit Distance". ACM Transactions on Algorithms. 6 (1): Article 2. doi:10.1145/1644015.1644017.
  34. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Pawlik, Mateusz; Augsten, Nikolaus (2011). "RTED: A Robust Algorithm for the Tree Edit Distance". Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment. 5 (4): 334–345. doi:10.14778/2095686.2095692.
  35. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Bringmann, Karl; Gawrychowski, Paweł; Mozes, Shay; Weimann, Oren (2020). "Tree Edit Distance Cannot Be Computed in Strongly Subcubic Time (Unless APSP Can)". ACM Transactions on Algorithms. 16 (4): Article 48. doi:10.1145/3381878.
  36. ^ Page Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css has no content.Shukla, Parijat; Somani, Arun K. (2015). Tree Matching Using Data Shaping. 2015 IEEE International Congress on Big Data. IEEE. pp. 166–173. doi:10.1109/BigDataCongress.2015.32.
Retrieved from "http://cosmopedia.co/index.php?title=Graph_edit_distance&oldid=15027039"