Skip to content

Could you include Weighted Betweenness Centrality? #8

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
iandreafc opened this issue May 24, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Could you include Weighted Betweenness Centrality? #8

iandreafc opened this issue May 24, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@iandreafc
Copy link

iandreafc commented May 24, 2020

I am wondering if we can infer the differences in performance while calculating Weighted Betweenness Centrality from the Shortest Path results you show.

If one algorithm is faster on the shortest path, does this mean it is faster also on betweenness?
Does the shortest path algorithm consider arc weights?

It would be great if you could include betweenness (in the version that considers arc weights) in the next benchmarks!

@iandreafc iandreafc changed the title Could you include Betweenness Centrality Could you include Weighted Betweenness Centrality? May 24, 2020
@timlrx
Copy link
Owner

timlrx commented May 25, 2020

I think to some extent you can given that the Betweenness involves calculating the shortest path between all pair of vertices of a graph. Though the caveat here is that in the benchmark I measured only the unweighted single source shortest pair as opposed to the weighted all pairs shortest problem. Even so, Lightgraphs should be the fastest due to the threaded shortest path implementation with Graphtool and Networkit taking 2nd place.

Will most definitely consider it the next time I am running the benchmark. Especially adding weights to the shortest path problem.

@iandreafc
Copy link
Author

Super, thanks! Can't wait to see how it goes :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants