Paper detail

Counting and localizing defective nodes by Boolean network tomography

Identifying defective items in larger sets is a main problem with many applications in real life situations. We consider the problem of localizing defective nodes in networks through an approach based on boolean network tomography (BNT), which is grounded on inferring informations from the boolean outcomes of end-to-end measurements paths. {\em Identifiability} conditions on the set of paths which guarantee discovering or counting unambiguously the defective nodes are of course very relevant. We investigate old and introduce new identifiability conditions contributing this problem both from a theoretical and applied perspective. (1) What is the precise tradeoff between number of nodes and number of paths such that at most $k$ nodes can be identified unambiguously ? The answer is known only for $k=1$ and we answer the question for any $k$, setting a problem implicitly left open in previous works. (2) We study upper and lower bounds on the number of unambiguously identifiable nodes, introducing new identifiability conditions which strictly imply and are strictly implied by unambiguous identifiability; (3) We use these new conditions on one side to design algorithmic heuristics to count defective nodes in a fine-grained way, on the other side to prove the first complexity hardness results on the problem of identifying defective nodes in networks via BNT. (4) We introduce a random model where we study lower bounds on the number of unambiguously identifiable defective nodes and we use this model to estimate that number on real networks by a maximum likelihood estimate approach

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.