Online structural graph clustering using frequent subgraph mining

ABSTRACT

The goal of graph clustering is to partition objects in a graph database into different clusters based on various criteria such as vertex connectivity, neighborhood similarity or the size of the maximum common subgraph. This can serve to structure the graph space and to improve the understanding of the data. In this paper, we present a novel method for structural graph clustering, i.e. graph clustering without generating features or decomposing graphs into parts. In contrast to many related approaches, the method does not rely on computationally expensive maximum common subgraph (MCS) operations or variants thereof, but on frequent subgraph mining. More specifically, our problem formulation takes advantage of the frequent subgraph miner gSpan (that performs well on many practical problems) without effectively generating thousands of subgraphs in the process. In the proposed clustering approach, clusters encompass all graphs that share a sufficiently large common subgraph. The size of the common subgraph of a graph in a cluster has to take at least a user-specified fraction of its overall size. The new algorithm works in an online mode (processing one structure after the other) and produces overlapping (non-disjoint) and nonexhaustive clusters. In a series of experiments, we evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of the structural clustering algorithm on various real world data sets of molecular graphs.

References

1. Inokuchi, A., Washio, T., Motoda, H.: An APriori-based algorithm for mining frequent substructures from graph data. In: PKDD '00: Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Principles of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, pp. 13-23 (2000).
2. Yan, X., Han, J.: gSpan: Graph-based substructure pattern mining. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, pp. 721-724 (2002).
3. Tsuda, K., Kudo, T.: Clustering Graphs by Weighted Substructure Mining. In: Cohen, W.W., Moore, A. (eds.) ICML 2006, pp. 953-960. ACM Press, New York (2006).
4. Stahl, M., Mauser, H.: Database clustering with a combination of fingerprint and maximum common substructure methods. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 45, 542-548 (2005).
5. Tsuda, K., Kurihara, K.: Graph mining with variational Dirichlet process mixture models. In: Proceedings of the 8th SIAM International Conference on Data Mining, pp. 432-442 (2008).
6. Martin, Y.C., Kofron, J.L., Traphagen, L.M.: Do structurally similar molecules have similar biological activity? J. Med. Chem. 45, 4350-4358 (2002).
7. Weinstein, J., Kohn, K., Grever, M., Viswanadhan, V.: Neural computing in cancer drug development: Predicting mechanism of action. Science 258, 447-451 (1992).
8. Koutsoukos, A.D., Rubinstein, L.V., Faraggi, D., Simon, R.M., Kalyandrug, S., Weinstein, J.N., Kohn, K.W., Paull, K.D.: Discrimination techniques applied to the NCI in vitro anti-tumour drug screen: predicting biochemical mechanism of action. Stat. Med. 13, 719-730 (1994).
9. Raymond, J.W., Willett, P.: Effectiveness of graph-based and fingerprint-based similarity measures for virtual screening of 2D chemical structure databases. J. Comput. Aided. Mol. Des. 16(1), 59-71 (2002).
10. McGregor, M.J., Pallai, P.V.: Clustering of large databases of compounds: Using the MDL "keys" as structural descriptors. J. Chem. Inform. Comput. Sci. 37(3), 443-448 (1997).
11. Yoshida, T., Shoda, R., Motoda, H.: Graph clustering based on structural similarity of fragments. In: Jantke, K.P., et al. (eds.) Federation over the Web. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3847, pp. 97-114. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).
12. Günter, S., Bunke, H.: Validation indices for graph clustering. Pattern Recogn. Lett. 24(8), 1107-1113 (2003).
13. Kohonen, T.: Self-organizing maps. Springer, Heidelberg (1997).
14. Chen, Y.L., Hu, H.L.: An overlapping cluster algorithm to provide nonexhaustive clustering. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 173(3), 762-780 (2006).
15. Raymond, J.W., Blankley, C.J., Willett, P.: Comparison of chemical clustering methods using graph- and fingerprint-based similarity measures. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 21(5), 421-433 (2003).
16. Bunke, H., Foggia, P., Guidobaldi, C., Sansone, C., Vento, M.: A comparison of algorithms for maximum common subgraph on randomly connected graphs. In: Caelli, T.M., Amin, A., Duin, R.P.W., Kamel, M.S., de Ridder, D. (eds.) SPR 2002 and SSPR 2002. LNCS, vol. 2396, pp. 123-132. Springer, Heidelberg (2002).
17. Aggarwal, C.C., Ta, N., Wang, J., Feng, J., Zaki, M.: XProj: a framework for projected structural clustering of XML documents. In: KDD '07: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 46-55. ACM, New York (2007).
18. Wang, K., Han, J.: Bide: Efficient mining of frequent closed sequences. In: International Conference on Data Engineering (2004).

Index Terms

• Computing methodologies

  • Machine learning

    • Learning paradigms

      • Unsupervised learning

        • Cluster analysis

• Information systems

  • Information retrieval

    • Retrieval tasks and goals

      • Clustering and classification

  • Information systems applications

    • Data mining

      • Clustering

• Mathematics of computing

  • Discrete mathematics

    • Graph theory

      • Graph algorithms