|
Data
|
N
|
M
|
S
|
Running times [s]
|
|---|
|
LSD
|
S + LSD+ f
|
LSD + B
|
S + B + f
|
|---|
|
Yeast
|
49,795
|
130,993
|
325
|
3
|
4
|
6
|
9
|
|
EU mail
|
265,214
|
420,045
|
13285
|
15
|
16
|
31
|
34
|
|
Slashdot
|
82,168
|
948,464
|
0
|
17
|
27
|
22
|
37
|
|
Amazon
|
403,394
|
3,387,388
|
3
|
60
|
86
|
87
|
158
|
|
Google
|
875,713
|
5,105,039
|
6477
|
94
|
127
|
144
|
254
|
|
Wikipedia
|
2,394,385
|
5,021,410
|
4737
|
147
|
171
|
385
|
418
|
- The for combinations of algorithms compared here are: LSD (using the auxiliary graphs \({\hat{G}}{C}\) and the stack-based superbubble detector), S+LSD using Sung graphs with our stack-based detector plus a post-filter for the false positives, LSD+B using our graph construction with the range-query-based detector of [8], and S+B using the re-implementation of the state of the art method with the post-filter. All computations were performed on a 2.5GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor (Turbo Boost up to 3.7GHz) with 6MB shared L3 cache and 16GB of 1600MHz DDR3L onboard memory. Test data sets are taken from [4] and from the Stanford Large Network Dataset Collection [21]. The table lists their number N of vertices, M of edges and S of superbubbles
