John Lapinskas

Ranking functions such as PageRank assign numeric values (ranks) to nodes of graphs, most notably the web graph. Node rankings are an integral part of Internet search algorithms, since they can be used to order the results of queries. However, these ranking functions are famously subject to attacks by spammers, who modify the web graph in order to give their own pages more rank. We characterize the interplay between rankers and spammers as a game. We define the two critical features of this game, spam resistance and distortion, based on how spammers spam and how rankers protect against spam. We observe that all the ranking functions that are well-studied in the literature, including the original formulation of PageRank, have poor spam resistance, poor distortion, or both. Finally, we study Min-PPR, the form of PageRank used at Google itself, but which has received no (theoretical or empirical) treatment in the literature. We prove that Min-PPR has low distortion and high spam resistance. A secondary benefit is that Min-PPR comes with an explicit cost function on nodes that shows how important they are to the spammer; thus a ranker can focus their spam-detection capacity on these vulnerable nodes. Both Min-PPR and its associated cost function are straightforward to compute.

In this paper, we prove “black box” results for turning algorithms which decide whether or not a witness exists into algorithms to approximately count the number of witnesses, or to sample from the set of witnesses approximately uniformly, with essentially the same running time. We do so by extending the framework of Dell and Lapinskas (STOC 2018), which covers decision problems that can be expressed as edge detection in bipartite graphs given limited oracle access; our framework covers problems which can be expressed as edge detection in arbitrary k-hypergraphs given limited oracle access. (Simulating this oracle generally corresponds to invoking a decision algorithm.) This includes many key problems in both the fine-grained setting (such as k-SUM, k-OV and weighted k-Clique) and the parameterised setting (such as induced subgraphs of size k or weight-k solutions to CSPs). From an algorithmic standpoint, our results will make the development of new approximate counting algorithms substantially easier; indeed, it already yields a new state-of-the-art algorithm for approximately counting graph motifs, improving on Jerrum and Meeks (JCSS 2015) unless the input graph is very dense and the desired motif very small. Our k-hypergraph reduction framework generalises and strengthens results in the graph oracle literature due to Beame et al. (ITCS 2018) and Bhattacharya et al. (CoRR abs/1808.00691).

The Moran process is a random process that models the spread of genetic mutations through graphs. On connected graphs, the process eventually reaches “fixation,” where all vertices are mutants, or “extinction,” where none are. Our main result is an almost‐tight upper bound on expected absorption time. For all ϵ>0, we show that the expected absorption time on an n‐vertex graph is o(n^3+ϵ). Specifically, it is at most , and there is a family of graphs where it is Ω(n³). In proving this, we establish a phase transition in the probability of fixation, depending on the mutants' fitness r. We show that no similar phase transition occurs for digraphs, where it is already known that the expected absorption time can be exponential. Finally, we give an improved fully polynomial randomized approximation scheme (FPRAS) for approximating the probability of fixation. On degree‐bounded graphs where some basic properties are given, its running time is independent of the number of vertices.

The Moran process, as studied by Lieberman, Hauert, and Nowak, is a randomised algorithm modelling the spread of genetic mutations in populations. The algorithm runs on an underlying graph where individuals correspond to vertices. Initially, one vertex (chosen uniformly at random) possesses a mutation, with fitness r > 1. All other individuals have fitness 1. During each step of the algorithm, an individual is chosen with probability proportional to its fitness, and its state (mutant or nonmutant) is passed on to an out-neighbour which is chosen uniformly at random. If the underlying graph is strongly connected, then the algorithm will eventually reach fixation , in which all individuals are mutants, or extinction , in which no individuals are mutants. An infinite family of directed graphs is said to be strongly amplifying if, for every r > 1, the extinction probability tends to 0 as the number of vertices increases. A formal definition is provided in the article. Strong amplification is a rather surprising property—it means that in such graphs, the fixation probability of a uniformly placed initial mutant tends to 1 even though the initial mutant only has a fixed selective advantage of r > 1 (independently of n ). The name “strongly amplifying” comes from the fact that this selective advantage is “amplified.” Strong amplifiers have received quite a bit of attention, and Lieberman et al. proposed two potentially strongly amplifying families—superstars and metafunnels. Heuristic arguments have been published, arguing that there are infinite families of superstars that are strongly amplifying. The same has been claimed for metafunnels. In this article, we give the first rigorous proof that there is an infinite family of directed graphs that is strongly amplifying. We call the graphs in the family “megastars.” When the algorithm is run on an n -vertex graph in this family, starting with a uniformly chosen mutant, the extinction probability is roughly n ^{− 1/2} (up to logarithmic factors). We prove that all infinite families of superstars and metafunnels have larger extinction probabilities (as a function of n ). Finally, we prove that our analysis of megastars is fairly tight—there is no infinite family of megastars such that the Moran algorithm gives a smaller extinction probability (up to logarithmic factors). Also, we provide a counterexample which clarifies the literature concerning the isothermal theorem of Lieberman et al.