An Improved Greedy Heuristic for the Minimum Positive Influence Dominating Set Problem in Social Networks
This paper presents a performance comparison of greedy heuristics for a recent variant of the dominating set problem known as the minimum positive influence dominating set (MPIDS) problem. This APX-hard combinatorial optimization problem has applications in social networks. Its aim is to identify a...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) |
| Repositorio: | DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:digital.csic.es:10261/253028 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/253028 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Greedy algorithm Minimum positive influence dominating Set problem Heuristic search Social networks |
| Sumario: | This paper presents a performance comparison of greedy heuristics for a recent variant of the dominating set problem known as the minimum positive influence dominating set (MPIDS) problem. This APX-hard combinatorial optimization problem has applications in social networks. Its aim is to identify a small subset of key influential individuals in order to facilitate the spread of positive influence in the whole network. In this paper, we focus on the development of a fast and effective greedy heuristic for the MPIDS problem, because greedy heuristics are an essential component of more sophisticated metaheuristics. Thus, the development of well-working greedy heuristics supports the development of efficient metaheuristics. Extensive experiments conducted on a wide range of social networks and complex networks confirm the overall superiority of our greedy algorithm over its competitors, especially when the problem size becomes large. Moreover, we compare our algorithm with the integer linear programming solver CPLEX. While the performance of CPLEX is very strong for small and medium-sized networks, it reaches its limits when being applied to the largest networks. However, even in the context of small and medium-sized networks, our greedy algorithm is only 2.53% worse than CPLEX. |
|---|