This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Graphons and the HH-property

Mohamed-Ali Belabbas  and  Xudong Chen M.-A. Belabbas is with the Coordinated Science Laboratory, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Email: belabbas@illinois.eduX. Chen is with the Electrical and Systems Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis. Email: cxudong@wustl.edu.
Abstract
00footnotetext: M.-A. Belabbas and X. Chen contributed equally to the manuscript in all categories.

A graphon satisfies the HH-property if graphs sampled from it contain a Hamiltonian decomposition almost surely, which in turn implies that the corresponding network topologies are, e.g., structurally stable and structurally ensemble controllable. In recent papers [1, 2], we have exhibited a set of conditions that is essentially necessary and sufficient for the HH-property to hold for the finite-dimensional class of step-graphons. The extension to the infinite-dimensional case of general graphons was hindered by the fact that said conditions relied on objects that do not admit immediate extensions to the infinite-dimensional case. We outline here our approach to bypass this difficulty and state conditions that guarantee that the HH-property holds for general graphons.

1 Introduction and Problem Formulation

Structural system theory deals with the problem of understanding when a given network topology can sustain a prescribed system property. Typical such properties are, e.g, controllability and stability. In more detail, consider a network of nn mobile agents x1,,xnx_{1},\ldots,x_{n}, whose communication topology is described by a directed graph (digraph) G=(V,E)G=(V,E), with the nodes v1,,vnv_{1},\ldots,v_{n} representing the agents and directed edges vivjv_{i}v_{j} indicating the information flow (with the convention that a directed edge vivjv_{i}v_{j} indicates that agent xjx_{j} can access state information from xix_{i}). Given the digraph GG, a system dynamics x˙(t)=f(x(t))\dot{x}(t)=f(x(t)) is said to be adapted to GG if the dynamics of xi(t)x_{i}(t) depend only on its incoming neighbors in GG: fixj0vjviE\frac{\partial f_{i}}{\partial x_{j}}\neq 0\Rightarrow v_{j}v_{i}\in E.

We denote by ΣG\Sigma_{G} the set of differentiable dynamics adapted to GG. Next, given a desired system property 𝒮\mathcal{S} (e.g., asymptotic stability at a given equilibrium), we say that the digraph GG sustains 𝒮\mathcal{S} if there exists a dynamics fΣGf\in\Sigma_{G} satisfying the property 𝒮\mathcal{S}. This research line was initiated by C.-T. Lin in his seminal paper [3] and led to several extensions, among which we mention the work of the authors on structural stability [4] and structural ensemble controllability [5] as they are the basis of the present work.

Graphons have recently been introduced in [6, 7] to study large graphs. A graphon can be seen as both the limit object of a convergent sequence (where convergence is in the cut-norm [8]) of graphs of increasing size, and as a statistical model from which to sample random graphs (we elaborate on this below). Mathematically, a graphon is a symmetric, measurable function W:[0,1]2[0,1]W:[0,1]^{2}\to[0,1], with W(x,y)=W(y,x)W(x,y)=W(y,x) for all x,y[0,1]2x,y\in[0,1]^{2}. We note that a graphon should be viewed as an equivalence class of such functions, where W1W2W_{1}\sim W_{2} if there exists a measure-preserving map ϕ:[0,1][0,1]\phi:[0,1]\to[0,1] such that W1(x,y)=W2(ϕ(x),ϕ(y))W_{1}(x,y)=W_{2}(\phi(x),\phi(y)). This is the continuous equivalent of saying that graphs that are equal up to relabeling of their nodes are in the same equivalence class. We will overlook this distinction for the sake of clarity, but all our statements lift to the equivalence class.

We next describe how to sample a graph GnG_{n} on nn nodes from a graphon WW.

Sampling procedure Let Uni[0,1]\mathrm{Uni}[0,1] be the uniform distribution on [0,1][0,1]. Given a graphon WW, a graph Gn=(V,E)G_{n}=(V,E) on nn nodes sampled from WW, written as GnWG_{n}\sim W, is obtained as follows:

  1. 1.

    Sample x1,,xnUni[0,1]x_{1},\ldots,x_{n}\sim\mathrm{Uni}[0,1] independently. We call xix_{i} the coordinate of node viVv_{i}\in V.

  2. 2.

    For any two distinct nodes viv_{i} and vjv_{j}, place an edge (vi,vj)E(v_{i},v_{j})\in E with probability W(xi,xj)W(x_{i},x_{j}).

Note that GnG_{n} is undirected and we denote by Gn=(V,E)\vec{G}_{n}=(V,\vec{E}) the directed version of GnG_{n}, with the edge set E:={vivj,vjvi(vi,vj)E}.\vec{E}:=\{v_{i}v_{j},v_{j}v_{i}\mid(v_{i},v_{j})\in E\}. In words, we replace an undirected edge (vi,vj)(v_{i},v_{j}) with the pair of directed edges vivjv_{i}v_{j} and vjviv_{j}v_{i}. See Figure 1 for illustration.

v1v_{1}v2v_{2}v3v_{3}v4v_{4}
(a)
v1v_{1}v2v_{2}v3v_{3}v4v_{4}
(b)
Figure 1: Left: An undirected graph on 44 nodes. Right: Its directed counterpart by replacing every undirected edge with two oppositely oriented edges.

In this abstract, we characterize the graphons WW with the property that network topologies sampled from WW are structurally stable [4] or structurally ensemble controllable [5] with probability one. Precisely, we have the following definition [2]:

Definition 1 (HH-property).

Let WW be a graphon and GnWG_{n}\sim W. Then, WW has the HH-property if

limn(Gn has a Hamiltonian decomposition)=1.\lim_{n\to\infty}\mathbb{P}(\vec{G}_{n}\mbox{ has a Hamiltonian decomposition})=1.

The problem we address can now be formulated as characterizing the HH-property in graphons.

2 Results for Step-graphons

As a stepping-stone to the study of the general case of graphons, we have studied in our recent work [2] the class of step-graphons (see Definition 2 below), and provided essentially necessary and sufficient conditions for the HH-property to hold in that context. We summarize below the key objects introduced to solve the problem as well as the main statement, as they are a blueprint for the study of the general case.

We start with the following definition:

Definition 2 (Step-graphon and its partition).

A graphon WW is a step-graphon if there exists an increasing sequence 0=σ0<σ1<<σq=10=\sigma_{0}<\sigma_{1}<\cdots<\sigma_{q}=1, for 1q<1\leq q<\infty, such that WW is constant over each rectangle [σi,σi+1)×[σj,σj+1)[\sigma_{i},\sigma_{i+1})\times[\sigma_{j},\sigma_{j+1}) for all 0i,jq10\leq i,j\leq q-1. The sequence σ=(σ0,σ1,,σq)\sigma=(\sigma_{0},\sigma_{1},\ldots,\sigma_{q}) is called a partition for WW.

It should be clear that for a given step-graphon WW, there exists infinitely many partition sequences (obtained, e.g., by sub-dividing intervals where the step-graphon is constant).

Step-graphons are related to stochastic block models [9], with the difference that nodes in stochastic block models are deterministically placed in intervals (called communities in that context) whereas, in the graphon case, the nodes are randomly placed.

Through our extant work, we have highlighted three key objects associated with a step-graphon WW as being of particular importance. We introduce them below:

Definition 3 (Concentration vector).

For a step-graphon with partition σ=(σ0,,σq)\sigma=(\sigma_{0},\ldots,\sigma_{q}), its concentration vector is x=(x1,,xq)x^{*}=(x^{*}_{1},\ldots,x^{*}_{q}), where xi:=σiσi1x^{*}_{i}:=\sigma_{i}-\sigma_{i-1}, for all i=1,,qi=1,\ldots,q.

It should be clear from the sampling procedure given above that the concentration vector describes the expected proportion of sampled nodes in each interval. The support of a step-graphon can be described by a graph, called skeleton graph, which is defined as

Definition 4 (Skeleton graph).

To a step-graphon WW with partition σ=(σ0,,σq)\sigma=(\sigma_{0},\ldots,\sigma_{q}), we assign the undirected graph S=(U,F)S=(U,F) on qq nodes, with U={u1,,uq}U=\{u_{1},\ldots,u_{q}\} and edge set FF defined as follows: there is an edge between uiu_{i} and uju_{j} if and only if WW is non-zero over [σi1,σi)×[σj1,σj)[\sigma_{i-1},\sigma_{i})\times[\sigma_{j-1},\sigma_{j}). We call SS the skeleton graph of WW for the partition sequence σ\sigma.

The last object we introduced is derived from the skeleton graph. Let F={f1,,fr}F=\{f_{1},\ldots,f_{r}\}, we let the edge-incidence matrix Bq×rB\in\mathbb{R}^{q\times r} of a graph S=(U,F)S=(U,F) be given as

bij:=12{2,if fjF is a self-loop on node ui,1,if node ui is incident to fjF,0,otherwise.b_{ij}:=\frac{1}{2}\begin{cases}2,&\text{if }f_{j}\in F\text{ is a self-loop on node }u_{i},\\ 1,&\text{if node }u_{i}\text{ is incident to }f_{j}\in F,\\ 0,&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases} (1)

Owing to the factor 12\frac{1}{2} in (1), all columns of BB are probability vectors, i.e., all entries are nonnegative and sum to one. The edge polytope of SS, introduced in [10], is

Definition 5 (Edge polytope).

Let S=(U,F)S=(U,F) be a skeleton graph and BB be the associated incidence matrix. Let bjb_{j}, for 1j|F|1\leq j\leq|F|, be the columns of BB. The edge polytope of SS, denoted by 𝒳(S)\mathcal{X}(S), is the convex hull generated by the bjb_{j}’s: 𝒳(S):=conv{bjj=1,,r}\mathcal{X}(S):=\operatorname{conv}\{b_{j}\mid j=1,\ldots,r\}.

We illustrate the above three key objects in Figure 2.

WW
SSu1u_{1}u2u_{2}u3u_{3}
x1x_{1}x2x_{2}x3x_{3}𝒳(S)\mathcal{X}(S)xx^{*}
Figure 2: Left: A step-graphon WW with partition σ=(0,0.3,0.6,1)\sigma=(0,0.3,0.6,1). Middle: Skeleton graph SS. Right: Edge polytope 𝒳(S)\mathcal{X}(S) and the concentration vector x=(0.3,0.3,0.4)x^{*}=(0.3,0.3,0.4).

To state the result, we introduce the following three conditions:

Condition AA:

The skeleton graph SS has an odd cycle.

Condition BB:

The concentration vector xx^{*} belongs to the relative interior of the edge polytope 𝒳(S)\mathcal{X}(S), i.e., xint𝒳(S)x^{*}\in\operatorname{int}\mathcal{X}(S).

Condition BB^{\prime}:

x𝒳(S)x^{*}\in\mathcal{X}(S).

The above conditions can be shown to be independent of the choice of a partition sequence σ\sigma [2]. The main results proved in [1, 2] are reproduced below

Theorem 1.

For almost all step-graphons WW, the probability that GnW\vec{G}_{n}\sim W has a Hamiltonian decomposition tends to either 0 or 11. Furthermore,

  • If Conditions AA and BB hold, then WW has the HH-property.

  • If either Condition AA or BB^{\prime} does not hold, then WW does not have the HH-property. In fact, for this case,

    limn(Gn has a Hamiltonian decomposition)=0.\lim_{n\to\infty}\mathbb{P}(\vec{G}_{n}\mbox{ has a Hamiltonian decomposition})=0.

For example, the step-graphon in Figure 2 satisfies Conditions A and B and, hence, has the HH-property.

3 Extension to General Graphons

We now discuss the general case of graphons. One first observes that while some objects introduced above, such as the concentration vector, admit a relatively simple translation to the infinite-dimensional case, the skeleton graph does not admit a simple infinite-dimensional equivalent. Since the edge-polytope was defined from the edge-incidence matrix of the skeleton graph, naive limits nn\to\infty do not yield useful results.

To circumvent this difficulty, we are forced to take a different approach to describing the edge-polytope of a graphon, that by-passes the use of the skeleton graph. Relying on some technical results in [2]—precisely, what we refer to as the AA-matrix of a step-graphon—we arrive at the following characterizations:

Extension of Condition A. Let Ls([0,1]2,)\mathrm{L}_{s}^{\infty}([0,1]^{2},\mathbb{R}) be the space of all measurable, bounded, and symmetric functions from [0,1]2[0,1]^{2} to \mathbb{R}. To a given graphon WW, we introduce the map:

ΦW:Ls([0,1]2,)L([0,1],):cx(s):=01W(s,t)c(s,t)dt.\Phi_{W}:\mathrm{L}_{s}^{\infty}([0,1]^{2},\mathbb{R})\to\mathrm{L}^{\infty}([0,1],\mathbb{R}):c\mapsto x(s):=\int^{1}_{0}W(s,t)c(s,t)\mathrm{d}t. (2)

Also, we let W¯\overline{W} be the saturation of WW, which is a graphon valued in {0,1}\{0,1\} defined as

W¯(x,y):={1if W(x,y)>0,0otherwise.\overline{W}(x,y):=\begin{cases}1&\mbox{if }W(x,y)>0,\\ 0&\mbox{otherwise}.\end{cases}

Graphons valued in {0,1}\{0,1\} are also called random-free graphons [11].

The following result, which characterizes the map Φ(W)\Phi(W) when WW is a step-graphon, highlights its importance to the analysis of the HH-property.

Proposition 2.

For WW a step-graphon and SS its skeleton graph, the map ΦW¯\Phi_{\overline{W}} is surjective if and only if SS has an odd-cycle.

We thus introduce the following condition as an extension of Condition AA:

Condition AextA_{\rm ext}:

ΦW¯\Phi_{\overline{W}} is surjective.

Extension of Condition B. To proceed, we introduce the operator that integrates a function x(s)x(s) over each interval of a given partition σ=(σ0,,σq)\sigma=(\sigma_{0},\ldots,\sigma_{q}):

μσ:L([0,1],)q:xx¯:=[σ0σ1x(s)dsσq1σqx(s)ds].\mu_{\sigma}:\mathrm{L}^{\infty}([0,1],\mathbb{R})\to\mathbb{R}^{q}:x\mapsto\bar{x}:=\begin{bmatrix}\displaystyle\int_{\sigma_{0}}^{\sigma_{1}}x(s)\mathrm{d}s\\ \vdots\\ \displaystyle\int_{\sigma_{q-1}}^{\sigma_{q}}x(s)\mathrm{d}s\end{bmatrix}. (3)

For WW a step-graphon with skeleton graph SS, we define

L(W):={x(s)L([0,1],0)μσ(x)𝒳(S)}.\mathrm{L}(W):=\{x(s)\in\mathrm{L}^{\infty}([0,1],\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0})\mid\mu_{\sigma}(x)\in\mathcal{X}(S)\}.

We state, without a proof, that L(W)\mathrm{L}(W) does not depend on the choice of partition sequence σ\sigma (and hence, of SS) for WW.

The space L(W)\mathrm{L}(W) can be thought of as a functional equivalent of the edge-polytope of a step-graphon, as the next proposition shows:

Proposition 3.

Let 𝟏L([0,1],0)\mathbf{1}\in\mathrm{L}^{\infty}([0,1],\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}) be the unit constant function. For WW a step-graphon with concentration vector xx^{*} and skeleton graph SS, 𝟏L(W)\mathbf{1}\in\mathrm{L}(W) (resp. 𝟏intL(W)\mathbf{1}\in\operatorname{int}\mathrm{L}(W)) if and only if x𝒳(S)x^{*}\in\mathcal{X}(S) (resp. xint𝒳(S)x^{*}\in\operatorname{int}\mathcal{X}(S)).

Even though L(W)\mathrm{L}(W) is a functional space, it still relies on SS for its definition and thus cannot be applied directly to general WW. To resolve the issue, we define

𝒳(W):={ΦW¯(c)|cLs([0,1]2,0) and ΦW¯(c)L1=1}.\mathcal{X}(W):=\left\{\Phi_{\overline{W}}(c)\bigm{|}c\in\mathrm{L}_{s}^{\infty}([0,1]^{2},\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0})\mbox{ and }\|\Phi_{\overline{W}}(c)\|_{\mathrm{L}^{1}}=1\right\}. (4)

Note that the requirement ΦW¯(c)L1=1\|\Phi_{\overline{W}}(c)\|_{\mathrm{L}^{1}}=1 is equivalent to suppWc(s,t)dsdt=1\int_{\operatorname{supp}W}c(s,t)\mathrm{d}s\mathrm{d}t=1. It should be clear that 𝒳(W)\mathcal{X}(W) is well defined for all graphons.

We have the following result:

Proposition 4.

For WW a step-graphon, 𝒳(W)=L(W)\mathcal{X}(W)=\mathrm{L}(W).

This proposition states that the 𝒳(W)\mathcal{X}(W) introduced above, which did not rely on the skeleton graph of WW, equals the space L(W)\mathrm{L}(W) and together with Proposition 3 shows that it can indeed serve as an equivalent of the edge-polytope applicable to the case of general graphons. This leads to the following extension of Condition B:

Condition BextB_{\rm ext}:

𝟏int𝒳(W)\mathbf{1}\in\operatorname{int}\mathcal{X}(W).

We are now in a position to state the main result of this abstract:

Theorem 5.

Given a graphon WW, let ΦW¯\Phi_{\overline{W}} and 𝒳(W)\mathcal{X}(W) be as in Eqns. (2) and (4), respectively. Then, WW has the HH-property if Conditions AextA_{\rm ext} and BextB_{\rm ext} are satisfied.

The proofs of the above results will appear in an upcoming paper.

References

  • [1] Mohamed-Ali Belabbas, Xudong Chen and Tamer Başar “On the H{H}-property for step-graphons and edge polytopes” In IEEE Control Systems Letters 6 IEEE, 2021, pp. 1766–1771
  • [2] Mohamed-Ali Belabbas and Xudong Chen “Geometric Characterization of the H{H}-property for Step-graphons” appeared online In IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control IEEE, 2023
  • [3] Ching-Tai Lin “Structural controllability” In IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 19.3 IEEE, 1974, pp. 201–208
  • [4] Mohamed-Ali Belabbas “Sparse stable systems” In Systems & Control Letters 62.10 Elsevier, 2013, pp. 981–987
  • [5] Xudong Chen “Sparse linear ensemble systems and structural controllability” In IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 67.7 IEEE, 2021, pp. 3337–3348
  • [6] László Lovász and Balázs Szegedy “Limits of dense graph sequences” In Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 96.6 Elsevier, 2006, pp. 933–957
  • [7] Christian Borgs et al. “Convergent sequences of dense graphs I: Subgraph frequencies, metric properties and testing” In Advances in Mathematics 219.6 Elsevier, 2008, pp. 1801–1851
  • [8] Alan Frieze and Ravi Kannan “Quick approximation to matrices and applications” In Combinatorica 19.2 Springer, 1999, pp. 175–220
  • [9] Paul W Holland, Kathryn Blackmond Laskey and Samuel Leinhardt “Stochastic blockmodels: First steps” In Social networks 5.2 Elsevier, 1983, pp. 109–137
  • [10] Hidefumi Ohsugi and Takayuki Hibi “Normal polytopes arising from finite graphs” In Journal of Algebra 207.2 Elsevier, 1998, pp. 409–426
  • [11] Svante Janson “Graphons, Cut Norm and Distance, Couplings and Rearrangements” New York Journal of Mathematics Monographs, 2013