Paper detail

Active Learning of Multiple Source Multiple Destination Topologies

We consider the problem of inferring the topology of a network with $M$ sources and $N$ receivers (hereafter referred to as an $M$-by-$N$ network), by sending probes between the sources and receivers. Prior work has shown that this problem can be decomposed into two parts: first, infer smaller subnetwork components (i.e., $1$-by-$N$'s or $2$-by-$2$'s) and then merge these components to identify the $M$-by-$N$ topology. In this paper, we focus on the second part, which had previously received less attention in the literature. In particular, we assume that a $1$-by-$N$ topology is given and that all $2$-by-$2$ components can be queried and learned using end-to-end probes. The problem is which $2$-by-$2$'s to query and how to merge them with the given $1$-by-$N$, so as to exactly identify the $2$-by-$N$ topology, and optimize a number of performance metrics, including the number of queries (which directly translates into measurement bandwidth), time complexity, and memory usage. We provide a lower bound, $\lceil \frac{N}{2} \rceil$, on the number of $2$-by-$2$'s required by any active learning algorithm and propose two greedy algorithms. The first algorithm follows the framework of multiple hypothesis testing, in particular Generalized Binary Search (GBS), since our problem is one of active learning, from $2$-by-$2$ queries. The second algorithm is called the Receiver Elimination Algorithm (REA) and follows a bottom-up approach: at every step, it selects two receivers, queries the corresponding $2$-by-$2$, and merges it with the given $1$-by-$N$; it requires exactly $N-1$ steps, which is much less than all $\binom{N}{2}$ possible $2$-by-$2$'s. Simulation results over synthetic and realistic topologies demonstrate that both algorithms correctly identify the $2$-by-$N$ topology and are near-optimal, but REA is more efficient in practice.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.