We propose and study a set of algorithms for discovering community structure in networks-natural divisions of network nodes into densely connected subgroups. Our algorithms all share two definitive features: first, they involve iterative removal of edges from the network to split it into communities, the edges removed being identified using any one of a number of possible "betweenness" measures, and second, these measures are, crucially, recalculated after each removal. We also propose a measure for the strength of the community structure found by our algorithms, which gives us an objective metric for choosing the number of communities into which a network should be divided. We demonstrate that our algorithms are highly effective at discovering community structure in both computer-generated and real-world network data, and show how they can be used to shed light on the sometimes dauntingly complex structure of networked systems.

/pdf/finding-and-evaluating-community-structure-in-networks-1o9f6y8pyr.pdf

Finding and evaluating community structure in networks.

Many networks of interest in the sciences, including social networks, computer networks, and metabolic and regulatory networks, are found to divide naturally into communities or modules. The problem of detecting and characterizing this community structure is one of the outstanding issues in the study of networked systems. One highly effective approach is the optimization of the quality function known as “modularity” over the possible divisions of a network. Here I show that the modularity can be expressed in terms of the eigenvectors of a characteristic matrix for the network, which I call the modularity matrix, and that this expression leads to a spectral algorithm for community detection that returns results of demonstrably higher quality than competing methods in shorter running times. I illustrate the method with applications to several published network data sets.

/pdf/modularity-and-community-structure-in-networks-l3cxahj8x9.pdf

Modularity and community structure in networks

http://www.maths.qmul.ac.uk/%7Elatora/report_06.pdf

Complex networks: Structure and dynamics

The modern science of networks has brought significant advances to our understanding of complex systems. One of the most relevant features of graphs representing real systems is community structure, or clustering, i. e. the organization of vertices in clusters, with many edges joining vertices of the same cluster and comparatively few edges joining vertices of different clusters. Such clusters, or communities, can be considered as fairly independent compartments of a graph, playing a similar role like, e. g., the tissues or the organs in the human body. Detecting communities is of great importance in sociology, biology and computer science, disciplines where systems are often represented as graphs. This problem is very hard and not yet satisfactorily solved, despite the huge effort of a large interdisciplinary community of scientists working on it over the past few years. We will attempt a thorough exposition of the topic, from the definition of the main elements of the problem, to the presentation of most methods developed, with a special focus on techniques designed by statistical physicists, from the discussion of crucial issues like the significance of clustering and how methods should be tested and compared against each other, to the description of applications to real networks.

/pdf/community-detection-in-graphs-34rogm3r6p.pdf

Community detection in graphs

Cloud Computing, the long-held dream of computing as a utility, has the potential to transform a large part of the IT industry, making software even more attractive as a service and shaping the way IT hardware is designed and purchased. Developers with innovative ideas for new Internet services no longer require the large capital outlays in hardware to deploy their service or the human expense to operate it. They need not be concerned about overprovisioning for a service whose popularity does not meet their predictions, thus wasting costly resources, or underprovisioning for one that becomes wildly popular, thus missing potential customers and revenue. Moreover, companies with large batch-oriented tasks can get results as quickly as their programs can scale, since using 1000 servers for one hour costs no more than using one server for 1000 hours. This elasticity of resources, without paying a premium for large scale, is unprecedented in the history of IT. Cloud Computing refers to both the applications delivered as services over the Internet and the hardware and systems software in the datacenters that provide those services. The services themselves have long been referred to as Software as a Service (SaaS). The datacenter hardware and software is what we will call a Cloud. When a Cloud is made available in a pay-as-you-go manner to the general public, we call it a Public Cloud; the service being sold is Utility Computing. We use the term Private Cloud to refer to internal datacenters of a business or other organization, not made available to the general public. Thus, Cloud Computing is the sum of SaaS and Utility Computing, but does not include Private Clouds. People can be users or providers of SaaS, or users or providers of Utility Computing. We focus on SaaS Providers (Cloud Users) and Cloud Providers, which have received less attention than SaaS Users. From a hardware point of view, three aspects are new in Cloud Computing.

/pdf/above-the-clouds-a-berkeley-view-of-cloud-computing-tkj3etim13.pdf

Above the Clouds: A Berkeley View of Cloud Computing

Reliability at massive scale is one of the biggest challenges we face at Amazon.com, one of the largest e-commerce operations in the world; even the slightest outage has significant financial consequences and impacts customer trust. The Amazon.com platform, which provides services for many web sites worldwide, is implemented on top of an infrastructure of tens of thousands of servers and network components located in many datacenters around the world. At this scale, small and large components fail continuously and the way persistent state is managed in the face of these failures drives the reliability and scalability of the software systems.This paper presents the design and implementation of Dynamo, a highly available key-value storage system that some of Amazon's core services use to provide an "always-on" experience. To achieve this level of availability, Dynamo sacrifices consistency under certain failure scenarios. It makes extensive use of object versioning and application-assisted conflict resolution in a manner that provides a novel interface for developers to use.

/pdf/dynamo-amazon-s-highly-available-key-value-store-2ozfk43ou4.pdf

Dynamo: amazon's highly available key-value store

Building reliable distributed systems at a worldwide scale demands trade-offs between consistency and availability.

/pdf/eventually-consistent-2hk2p80bcy.pdf

Eventually consistent

Scalable management and self-organizational capabilities are emerging as central requirements for a generation of large-scale, highly dynamic, distributed applications. We have developed an entirely new distributed information management system called Astrolabe. Astrolabe collects large-scale system state, permitting rapid updates and providing on-the-fly attribute aggregation. This latter capability permits an application to locate a resource, and also offers a scalable way to track system state as it evolves over time. The combination of features makes it possible to solve a wide variety of management and self-configuration problems. This paper describes the design of the system with a focus upon its scalability. After describing the Astrolabe service, we present examples of the use of Astrolabe for locating resources, publish-subscribe, and distributed synchronization in large systems. Astrolabe is implemented using a peer-to-peer protocol, and uses a restricted form of mobile code based on the SQL query language for aggregation. This protocol gives rise to a novel consistency model. Astrolabe addresses several security considerations using a built-in PKI. The scalability of the system is evaluated using both simulation and experiments; these confirm that Astrolabe could scale to thousands and perhaps millions of nodes, with information propagation delays in the tens of seconds.

/pdf/astrolabe-a-robust-and-scalable-technology-for-distributed-2681334o7d.pdf

Astrolabe: A robust and scalable technology for distributed system monitoring, management, and data mining

The U-Net communication architecture provides processes with a virtual view of a network interface to enable userlevel access to high-speed communication devices. The architecture, implemented on standard workstations using offthe-shelf ATM communication hardware, removes the kernel from the communication path, while still providing full protection. The model presented by U-Net allows for the construction of protocols at user level whose performance is only limited by the capabilities of network. The architecture is extremely flexible in the sense that traditional protocols like TCP and UDP, as well as novel abstractions like Active Messages can be implemented efficiently. A U-Net prototype on an 8node ATM cluster of standard workstations offers 65 microseconds round-trip latency and 15 Mbytes/sec bandwidth. It achieves TCP performance at maximum network bandwidth and demonstrates performance equivalent to Meiko CS-2 and TMC CM-5 supercomputers on a set of Split-C benchmarks.

/pdf/u-net-a-user-level-network-interface-for-parallel-and-buva1gimsh.pdf

Werner Vogels

Papers

Dynamo: amazon's highly available key-value store

Eventually consistent

Astrolabe: A robust and scalable technology for distributed system monitoring, management, and data mining

U-Net: a user-level network interface for parallel and distributed computing

技術解説 IEEE Computer