Abstract

Given a vertex in a (k,φ,ε)(k, φ, ε)-clusterable graph, i.e. a graph whose vertex set can be partitioned into a disjoint union of φφ-expanders of size ≈n/k\approx n/k with outer conductance bounded by εε, can one quickly tell which cluster it belongs to? This question goes back to the expansion testing problem of Goldreich and Ron'11. For k=2k=2 a sample of ≈n1/2+O(ε/φ2)\approx n^{1/2+O(ε/φ^2)} logarithmic length walks from a given vertex approximately determines its cluster membership by the birthday paradox: two vertices whose random walk samples are `close' are likely in the same cluster. The study of the general case k>2k>2 was initiated by Czumaj, Peng and Sohler [STOC'15], and the works of Chiplunkar et al. [FOCS'18], Gluch et al. [SODA'21] showed that ≈poly(k)⋅n1/2+O(ε/φ2)\approx \text{poly}(k)\cdot n^{1/2+O(ε/φ^2)} random walk samples suffice for general kk. This matches the k=2k=2 result up to polynomial factors in kk, but creates a conceptual inconsistency: if the birthday paradox is the guiding phenomenon, then the query complexity should decrease with the number of clusters kk! Since clusters have size ≈n/k\approx n/k, we expect to need ≈(n/k)1/2+O(ε/φ2)\approx (n/k)^{1/2+O(ε/φ^2)} random walk samples, which decreases with kk. We design a novel representation of vertices in a (k,φ,ε)(k, φ, ε)-clusterable graph by a mixture of logarithmic length walks. This representation uses the optimal ≈(n/k)1/2+O(ε/φ2)\approx (n/k)^{1/2+O(ε/φ^2)} walks per vertex, and allows for a fast nearest neighbor search: given kk vertices representing the clusters, we can find the cluster of a given query vertex xx using nearly linear time in the representation size of xx. This gives a clustering oracle with query time ≈(n/k)1/2+O(ε/φ2)\approx (n/k)^{1/2+O(ε/φ^2)} and space complexity k⋅(n/k)1/2+O(ε/φ2)k\cdot (n/k)^{1/2+O(ε/φ^2)}, matching the birthday paradox bound.

Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.

Building this map preview

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

Reviews 0

Write a reviewWrite

No reviews yet.

Discussion 0

Add a commentWrite

No comments yet.