2019
DOI: 10.1109/tkde.2018.2833124
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Supergraph Search in Graph Databases via Hierarchical Feature-Tree

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Hierarchical classification is a special case of multi-label or multi-output problems [41], [42]. It has been applied to traditional supervised learning tasks [43], such as text classification [44], [45], community data [46], case-based reasoning [47], popularity prediction [48], supergraph search in graph databases [49], road networks [50], image annotation and robot navigation. However, to the best of our knowledge, our paper is the first work successfully leveraging class hierarchy information in few-shot learning and metalearning tasks.…”
Section: Hierarchical Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hierarchical classification is a special case of multi-label or multi-output problems [41], [42]. It has been applied to traditional supervised learning tasks [43], such as text classification [44], [45], community data [46], case-based reasoning [47], popularity prediction [48], supergraph search in graph databases [49], road networks [50], image annotation and robot navigation. However, to the best of our knowledge, our paper is the first work successfully leveraging class hierarchy information in few-shot learning and metalearning tasks.…”
Section: Hierarchical Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lyu et al [24] proposes novel indexing and query processing methods and in indexing, optimum set of features is selected from the graphs. Feature tree is constructed with all sized features.…”
Section: A Work On Conventional Subgraph Miningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, update of graph indexing by each successful query will be suited to improve all users' satisfaction rate. Table II • Increase in time consumption due to the execution of dynamic bag classification KNN with LSH [23] • Not suitable for large-scale graph database • High storage space is required Lightweight graph compression [24] • Results are tampered and irrelevant to the query • Index is frequently changed Lazy learning algorithm [25] • Malicious behaviors are invoked • Privacy breaches in sensitive information Top-k subgraphs [26] • Execution of top-k in each query increases Hierachical multiple clustering [27] • Not able to support large-scale graph database • Not suited for complex database KNN+MapRed uce [28] • Increases complexity while finding all nearest neighbors • Very complex method that induces the poor accuracy • Both time and space complexity is very high Peer to Peer based Indexing [32] • Time and space complexity is very high due to tree traversal • High complexity due to multiway multidimensional indexing…”
Section: Work On Query Logs Compositionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation