1: \documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}%,aasms
2: \def\abs{\mid}
3: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
4: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
5: \def\beq{\begin{eqnarray}}
6: \def\eeq{\end{eqnarray}}
7: \def\lra#1{\left\langle #1\right\rangle}
8: \def\part{\partial}
9: \def\nn{\nonumber}
10: \def\l{\left}
11: \def\r{\right}
12:
13: \def\Q{{\bf Q}}
14: \def\br{{\bf r}}
15: \def\la{\lambda}
16: \def\f{{\bf f}}
17: \def\k{{\bf k}}
18: \def\hbz{\hat {\bf z}}
19: \def\hbw{\hat {\bf w}}
20: \def\bj{{\bf j}}
21: \def\ep{\epsilon}
22: \def\w{{\bf w}}
23: \def\a{{\bf a}}
24: \def\A{{\bf A}}
25: \def\x{{\bf x}}
26: \def\ve{\varepsilon}
27: \def\etal{{\it et al.\ }}
28: \def\b{{\bf b}}
29: \def\B{{\bf B}}
30:
31: \def\v{{\bf v}}
32: \def\V{{\bf V}}
33: \def\OV{\overline{\V}}
34: \def\OB{\overline{\B}}
35: \def\ob{\overline{B}}
36: \def\hw{\hat w}
37: \def\kdotB{\k \cdot \OB}
38:
39:
40: \begin{document}
41: \baselineskip=24pt
42: \begin{center}
43: {\Large\bf A Note on Power-Laws of Internet Topology}
44: \bigbreak
45: {\large\bf by}
46: \medbreak
47: {\large\bf Hongsong Chou } \\
48: {\it Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138}\\
49: {\it chou5@fas.harvard.edu}
50: \end{center}
51: \begin{abstract}
52: The three Power-Laws proposed by Faloutsos \etal(1999) are important
53: discoveries among many recent works on finding hidden rules in the
54: seemingly chaotic Internet topology. In this note, we want to point out
55: that the first two laws discovered by Faloutsos \etal(1999, hereafter,
56: {\it Faloutsos' Power Laws}) are in fact equivalent. That is, as long as any one of
57: them is true, the other can be derived from it, and {\it vice
58: versa}. Although these two laws are equivalent, they provide different
59: ways to measure the exponents of their corresponding power law
60: relations. We also show that these two measures will give equivalent
61: results, but with different error bars. We argue that for nodes of not
62: very large out-degree($\leq 32$ in our simulation), the first Faloutsos'
63: Power Law is superior to the second one in giving a better estimate of
64: the exponent, while for nodes of very large out-degree($> 32$) the
65: power law relation may not be present, at least for the relation
66: between the frequency of out-degree and node out-degree.
67: \end{abstract}
68:
69: \section{Introduction}
70: The past five years has been the golden time for the 30 year old Internet,
71: during which it experienced fascinating evolution, both exponential
72: growth in its traffic and endless expansion in its topology. Such
73: growth makes more thorough and rigorous analysis of the nature of
74: Internet traffic and topology an urgent task. It is also a very
75: difficult one. It was ever believed that the mathematical theories for
76: {\it circuit switching} telephone networks might be good enough for
77: analyzing the Internet traffic and topology. However, later it was found that
78: the Internet, as a {\it package switching} network, has very different
79: nature and successful mathematical theories for the Internet can be
80: quite different from those for telephone networks(see Willinger and
81: Paxson(1998) for more details).
82:
83: As the Internet grows at an astonishing speed, more and more high
84: quality data have been collected in recent years. These data make thorough
85: studies possible. The pioneering work by Leland \etal(1994) shows that
86: the traffic of Local Area Network(LAN) appears to be self-similar at different
87: scales. Discoveries of other self-similarities such as the one found in
88: Wide Area Network(WAN) by Paxson and Floyd(1995) make Internet
89: engineers and interested mathematicians contemplate that some special
90: power laws such as the heavy tail distribution might be the hidden
91: rules in Internet traffic(see Willinger and Paxson(1998) or Willinger,
92: Paxson and Taqqu(1998)).
93:
94: The discovery of three Power Laws by Faloutsos, Faloutsos and
95: Faloutsos(1999) is one of the most recent work on the Internet
96: topology. They view the Internet as an undirected graph. For each node
97: in the graph, it has properties such as the out-degree. Faloutsos'
98: discovery is not just power laws for the large scale properties of
99: the Internet, but rather the relationships between nodes at different
100: scales, running from a host on a LAN to the range encompassed by the whole
101: Internet. Without a doubt, such discovery is important not only to our
102: understanding of the very nature of the rapidly growing Internet, but also
103: to any reasonable simulations of LANs or WANs or the whole Internet.
104:
105: Yet, as we will point out in section 2 of this note, the first two Power Laws in
106: Faloutsos' discovery are not independent to each other. In fact, they
107: are equivalent so each one can be derived from the other. In section 3,
108: we
109: will go further to show that the data analysis in Faloutsos' work
110: toward discovering Power Law 1 is superior to the data analysis work
111: done for Power Law 2, simply because the former data analysis will give
112: more accurate estimate comparing to the later one. Conclusions are
113: summarized in the last section, section 4.
114:
115: \section{Equivalence Between the first and the second Faloutsos' Power
116: Laws}
117:
118: Throughout this note, we adopt the notations used in Faloutsos'
119: work. The Internet is viewed as an undirected graph $G$, and the number
120: of nodes and the number of edges in $G$ are $N$ and $E$,
121: respectively. The out-degree of a node $v$, which is the number of edges
122: incident to the node, is denoted by $d_v$. Note that in $G$, different
123: nodes may have the same out-degree. That is, if we can group all the
124: nodes which have the same out-degree $d$ and index the group, then for
125: the nodes in the $l^{th}$ group, they have the same out-degree denoted
126: by $dl$. The number of nodes in this $l^{th}$ group, which gives the
127: frequency of appearances of out-degree $dl$ in $G$, is denoted by
128: $f_{dl}$. Sometimes we just write $f_d$ to denote the frequency of $d$
129: in $G$. This is because the out-degree $d$, which always starts from 1
130: throughout this note, can be used to index the groups of nodes of different
131: out-degrees, thus $f_d$ is the number of nodes in the $d^{th}$ group for
132: out-degree $d$. The {\it rank}, $r_{v}$, of a node $v$ which has an
133: out-degree $d$ is the global index of the node among all of the nodes
134: in the order of decreasing out-degree.
135:
136: The first and second Faloutsos' Power Laws can be stated as
137: \be
138: d_v=C_1 r_{v}^R
139: \ee
140: and
141: \be
142: f_{d}=C_2 d^O
143: \ee
144: respectively. Here $C_1$ is a constant and can be determined by any given pair of
145: $d_v$ and $r_v$ measured from data collected from the Internet. $C_2$
146: is another constant and can be calculated from a pair of $f_{d}$ and
147: $d$. $R$ and $O$ are the two exponents of the Power Laws.
148:
149: By definition, the frequency of out-degree $d$ in $G$, $f_d$, is
150: related to the ranks of those nodes which have out-degree $d$. Suppose
151: node $v_{d-1}$ is a node of out-degree $d-1$, and it is the last
152: indexed node with rank $r_v^{\prime}$ in the group consisting of nodes
153: which all have out-degree $d-1$. Further suppose that node $v_d$ is a node of
154: out-degree $d$, and it is the last indexed node, with rank $r_v$, in
155: the group consisting of nodes of out-degree $d$. Then $f_d$ is related
156: to $r_v^{\prime}$ and $r_v$ through the relation
157: \be
158: f_{d} = r_v^{\prime} - r_v.
159: \ee
160: We may re-write relation (1) as
161: \be
162: r_v=\left ( \frac{1}{C_1} \right )^{\frac{1}{R}} d_v^{\frac{1}{R}}.
163: \ee
164: Note that the first order approximation to the right hand side of (3) is
165: in fact the first order derivative of the right hand side of (4) with
166: respect to $d$:
167: \be
168: f_d={r_v^{\prime} - r_v} \approx -\frac{1}{R}\left ( \frac{1}{C_1} \right
169: )^{\frac{1}{R}} d^{\frac{1}{R}-1}
170: \ee
171: From (4) to (5) we changed $d_v$ to $d$ because for all nodes of the group where
172: node $v_d$ is in, they all have the same out-degree $d$. Comparing (5) and (2), we have
173: \be
174: O \approx \frac{1}{R}-1
175: \ee
176: and
177: \be
178: C_2 \approx -\frac{1}{R}\left ( \frac{1}{C_1} \right
179: )^{\frac{1}{R}}.
180: \ee
181: Thus we have derived the second Power Law from the first Power Law. To
182: derive the first Power Law from the second, we have to integrate
183: relation (2) from 1 to $d_v$ to get $r_v$, then compare the result with
184: relation (4). By doing this, we have
185: \be
186: R \approx \frac{1}{O+1}
187: \ee
188: and
189: \be
190: C_1 \approx \left (\frac{-O-1}{C_2} \right)^R.
191: \ee
192: (6), (7) and (8), (9) shows that whenever we have one of the two Power
193: Laws, exponent and the constant of the other one can be derived from
194: the given parameters. That is, in data analysis of the Internet
195: topology, once we have measured $r_v$ at different out-degrees and found
196: a power law relation with exponent $R$ between them, we do not need to measure
197: $f_d$ at different out-degrees because the power law relation between
198: $r_v$ and out-degree will guarantee the power law relation between $f_d$
199: and $d$ with an exponent $O \approx \frac{1}{R}-1$. In simulations,
200: samples generated according to Power Law 1 will follow Power Law 2
201: automatically, and {\it vice versa}.
202:
203: In Table 1 and Table 2, we list the comparisons of
204: the derived parameters using above relations and the measured
205: parameters given in the work of Faloutsos'. From table 1 we find our
206: calculated exponent $O$ of Power Law 2 is quite close to the measured
207: one, except the last case, which is the Rout-95 dataset. The small
208: discrepancy shows that mere coincidence is not likely. For the
209: comparison of our calculated exponent $R$ and the measured $R$ in table
210: 2, although the relative errors are larger than those in table 1, for
211: the first three cases they are still below 15\%.
212:
213: \section{Better Way to Estimate Exponent}
214: When deriving relations (6) and (8) in above section, we assumed first
215: that one of the Power Laws must hold. In the derivation, we used
216: differentiation and integration, which can only be approximately
217: correct because the real datasets are discrete samples. Suppose at one
218: sampling position, such as an out-degree $d$, the measured rank is $r_v$,
219: and our calculated rank by integrating equation (2) is ${\hat r}_v$. We denote the
220: difference between $r_v$ and ${\hat r}_v$ by $\epsilon$, and call it an
221: {\it error term} for the estimation of rank at out-degree $d$. We
222: can define a similar error term, $\eta$, for the estimation of
223: frequency at out-degree $d$ with equation (5). The errors, both
224: $\epsilon$ and $\eta$, can be the measurement errors, the round-off
225: errors, or the errors due to the discrete nature of our sampling, and
226: in most cases, the combination of them all.
227:
228: Non-zero $\epsilon$ will affect our estimation of $O$ made in table
229: (1). Non-zero $\eta$ will also affect our estimation of $R$ in table
230: (2), but in a different way from how $\epsilon$ affects estimating
231: $O$. We find that the relative errors for the first three cases in
232: table (1) are smaller than those in table (2). In other words, the
233: derivation of $O$ from $R$ by differentiating equation (4) gives closer
234: to measured results than the derivation of $R$ from $O$ by integrating
235: equation (2). This is because that if rank $r_v$ has error $\epsilon$,
236: then from equation (3) the error in $f_d$ will be of the order
237: $\sim O(\epsilon)$. However, if $f_d$ has error $\eta$, then the error in
238: $r_v$, which can be obtained by integrating equation (2), is in fact an
239: accumulation of $\eta$ in the summation, which is $\sim O(n\eta)$ where
240: $n$ is the number of out-degrees used in the integration. Hence, even
241: though the two Power Laws are equivalent, deriving the second Power Law
242: from the first one will give better estimate, i.e., estimate with smaller
243: errors if $\epsilon \sim \eta$, of the second Power Law than the
244: estimate of the first Power Law derived from the second one.
245:
246: In Faloutsos' work, they applied linear regression to obtain the Power
247: Laws. We have shown above that Power Laws 1 and 2 are equivalent,
248: therefore the two linear regressions applied in Faloutsos' work should
249: give the same answer. That is, if we start from a Power Law relation
250: between rank $r$ and out-degree $d$, for example, $d = C_1 r^R$, and
251: deduce the relation between frequency $f_d$ and $d$, the relation should also
252: be a power law. for example, $f_d = C_2 d^O$, and the exponent $O$
253: should be related to $R$ through (6). In Figure 1, the $\star$'s show the relation
254: \be
255: d = C_1 r^{-1.0}.
256: \ee
257: Note the logarithmic scales on both axes. There are 2000 data
258: generated, so the rank $r$ runs from 1 to 2000. The heavy solid line is
259: the linear fitting to the $\star$'s, with slope $-0.85$, instead of $-1$ as
260: we expect. This is due to the discretization of the data. The $\star$'s with
261: out-degree $d>1$ have a linear fitting of slope $-0.97$, which is shown
262: in Figure 1 as the dash line. Apparently the data of out-degree 1 have
263: large effect on the linear fitting.
264:
265: In Figure 2, we plot the relation between $f_d$ and $d$ based on the
266: data($\star$'s) collected in Figure 1. A few data of frequency 1 and
267: out-degree $d>33$ are outliers and discarded in the fitting made in Figure
268: 2, which is shown as a heavy solid line. The number of these discarded outliers
269: is 26, only 1.3\% of the total data. The slope of the linear fitting is
270: $-2.01$, which is what we expect because of the equivalence of the two
271: Power Laws, i.e., equation (6).
272:
273: \section{Discussions and Conclusions}
274: Given the definitions of frequency $f_d$ and rank $r$, it is not
275: surprising to see the equivalence of the first two Power Laws proposed by
276: Faloutsos \etal We have proved such equivalence and demonstrated the mutual
277: determination of these two relations, therefore it is not possible nor
278: necessary for any simulations to follow these two power relations
279: independently. However, as we have shown in section 3, determining the
280: power relation between frequency $f_d$ and out-degree $d$ by analyzing
281: the data of rank $r_v$ as a function of our-degree $d$, will give
282: estimates of smaller error comparing to the estimate made in reversed
283: order, i.e., the estimate of the power law relation between rank $r$
284: and out-degree $d$ by analyzing the data of frequency $f_d$ as a
285: function of out-degree $d$. For any set of data measured from the
286: Internet, they will follow the power law only {\it approximately}, not
287: always exactly, especially the nodes of very high out-degree and
288: frequency 1, or the nodes of out-degree 1, as we show in Figures (1) and
289: (2). In simulations, these nodes should be treated with special care.
290:
291: If the probability density function for the appearance of nodes with out-degree
292: $s$ in the Internet is $\rho(s)$, then the average number of nodes
293: whose out-degrees run from $d_1$ to $d_2$ is
294: \be
295: \int_{d_1}^{d_2} s \rho(s) ds,
296: \ee
297: with which we can deduce the relation between frequency $f_d$ at out-degree
298: $d$ and the probability density function $\rho(s)$ as
299: \be
300: f_d \approx \int_{d-\Delta d}^{d+\Delta d} s \rho(s) ds \approx \rho(d)
301: d,
302: \ee
303: where we assume $2 \Delta d = 1$. If $f_d = C_2 d^O$, we have the
304: probability density function $\rho(d)$ as
305: \be
306: \rho(s) \approx C_2 d^{O-1}
307: \ee
308: which is a heavy tail distribution. The rank $r$ is related to the
309: function $\rho(d)$ through the integration
310: \be
311: r(d)=\int_1^d s \rho(s) ds
312: \ee
313: for $d>1$.
314:
315: The Power Laws show the relations between nodes of different
316: out-degrees when the Internet is in steady state. In order to study
317: the dynamics of the Internet, it would be very interesting to inject
318: nodes of some specific out-degrees into the Internet, and follow the
319: temporal evolution of these nodes. By the time we inject nodes of some
320: specific out-degree, we alter the power law relationship between $f_d$
321: and $d$ by adding a spike-like disturbance(see Figure 3). If a steady
322: Internet does follow power laws, tracing the evolution of the
323: spike-like disturbance will tell us how the disturbance will be
324: propagated, or {\it cascaded}, toward higher out-degree and lower
325: out-degree directions(shown by the two arrows in Figure 3), the spike
326: being broadened at the same time(shown by the dash line in Figure
327: 3). In real life, such spike-like disturbance could be due to the sharp
328: increase in the number of Internet users signing onto their
329: ISPs. Studies on the dynamic evolution of the Internet due to such
330: spike-like disturbances will be included in our future work.
331: \acknowledgements
332:
333: \clearpage
334: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}
335: \footnotesize
336: \tablecaption{Exponent O: measured and calculated with equation (6). \label{tbl-1}}
337: \tablewidth{0pt}
338: \tablehead{
339: \colhead{dataset} & \colhead{measured R} & \colhead{measured O} &
340: \colhead{calculated O } & \colhead{relative error}
341: }
342:
343: \startdata
344: Int-11-97 &$-$0.81 &$-$2.15 &$-$2.23 &4\% \nl
345: Int-04-98 &$-$0.82 &$-$2.16 &$-$2.22 &4\% \nl
346: Int-12-98 &$-$0.74 &$-$2.20 &$-$2.35 &7\% \nl
347: Rout-95 &$-$0.48 &$-$2.48 &$-$3.08 &25\% \nl
348: \enddata
349:
350: \end{deluxetable}
351:
352: \clearpage
353: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}
354: \footnotesize
355: \tablecaption{Exponent R: measured and calculated with equation (8). \label{tbl-2}}
356: \tablewidth{0pt}
357: \tablehead{
358: \colhead{dataset} & \colhead{measured O} & \colhead{measured R} &
359: \colhead{calculated R } & \colhead{relative error}
360: }
361:
362: \startdata
363: Int-11-97 &$-$2.15 &$-$0.81 &$-$0.87 &7.4\% \nl
364: Int-04-98 &$-$2.16 &$-$0.82 &$-$0.86 &5\% \nl
365: Int-12-98 &$-$2.20 &$-$0.74 &$-$0.83 &12\% \nl
366: Rout-95 &$-$2.48 &$-$0.48 &$-$0.68 &42\% \nl
367: \enddata
368:
369: \end{deluxetable}
370:
371: \begin{thebibliography}{}
372:
373: \bibitem[]{}Faloutsos, M., Faloutsos, P. and Faloutsos, C.: On
374: Power-Law Relationships of the Internet Topology, SIGCOMM'99,
375: Cambridge, MA. http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~michalis/papers.html
376:
377: \bibitem[]{}Leland, W.E., Taqqu, M.S., Willinger, W. and Wilson, D.V.:
378: On the self-similar nature of ethernet traffic. {\it IEEE Transactions
379: on Networking}, 2(1):1-15, February 1994.
380:
381: \bibitem[]{}Paxson, V. and Floyd, S.: Wide-area traffic: The failure of
382: Poisson modeling. {\it IEEE/ACM Transactions in Networking},
383: 3(3):226-244, June 1995
384:
385: \bibitem[]{}Willinger, W. and Paxson, V,: Where Mathematics meets the
386: Internet. In {\it Notices of the American Mathematical Society}, 45(8),
387: pp.961-970, Sept. 1998
388:
389: \bibitem[]{}Willinger, W., Paxson, V. and Taqqu, M.S.: Self-similarity
390: and heavy-tails: Structure modeling of network traffic. In {\it A
391: Practical Guide to Heavy Tails: Statistics; Techniques and Applications},
392: 1998. Adler, R., Feldman, R. and Taqqu, M.S., editors, Birkhauser
393:
394: \end{thebibliography}
395:
396: \clearpage
397:
398: \begin{figure}[htbp]
399:
400: \plotfiddle{f1.eps}{6in}{0}{70}{70}{-210}{-25}
401:
402: \caption{Out-degree $d$ {\it vs.} rank $r$. The $\star$'s are 2000 data
403: points obtained from the relation (10) in text. The heavy solid line of
404: slope $-0.85$ is the fitting to these data. Dash line is the fitting to
405: the data of out-degree greater than 1, with slope $-0.97$.
406: }
407: \end{figure}
408:
409: \begin{figure}[htbp]
410:
411: \plotfiddle{f2.eps}{6in}{0}{70}{70}{-210}{-25}
412:
413: \caption{Frequency {\it vs.} out-degree $d$, following Fig. 1. The
414: $\star$'s are data calculated with relation (3) in text. The heavy solid line is the fitting to
415: data of out-degrees less than 33. The number of discarded data in the
416: linear fitting is 26, only 1.3\% of the total data.}
417: \end{figure}
418:
419: \begin{figure}[htbp]
420:
421: \plotfiddle{f3.eps}{6in}{0}{70}{70}{-210}{-25}
422:
423: \figcaption{The cascade of spike-like disturbance of steady state
424: Internet toward large or small out-degree directions.}
425: \end{figure}
426:
427: \end{document}
428: