I Label propagation equation: what are the terms?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Master1022
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Propagation Terms
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on clarifying the terms in the label propagation equation, specifically equation (2.15). Participants agree that ##f## is a vector, ##S## is a matrix, and ##\alpha## is a scalar, while there is uncertainty about whether ##y## is a vector or scalar. It is suggested that if ##y## were a scalar, it would imply a uniform value across all nodes, which seems unlikely given the context. The consensus leans towards ##y## being a vector, as this aligns with the need for matrix-vector multiplication in the equation. Overall, the terms can be defined as functions of vertices, with ##f## and ##y## represented as vectors over the set of vertices.
Master1022
Messages
590
Reaction score
116
TL;DR
What terms in the equation (from the linked paper) are vectors or scalars?
Hi,

This is a simple question that I just wanted to clarify. I was reading the following paper on label propagation: HERE and I can't understand whether the terms are vectors or scalars in one of the equations - specifically, equation (2.15) shown in the image below.
Screen Shot 2022-05-03 at 11.02.57 AM.png


My understanding:
- ##f## is a vector
- ## S ## is a matrix
- ## \alpha ## is a scalar
- I am not too sure about ##y##: could be a vector or a scalar.
- ##\nu##: I am not too sure, but I think it could be referring to a specific node? That is, ## f(\nu) ## could be the value of the vector ## f## at node ## \nu ##.
- ## y ##: I am not sure, but I think it is a vector (see reasoning below).

Case is ## y ## is a scalar:
- That would make sense mathematically, but does that mean that we are using the same scalar ## y ## the equation for all nodes. That is, it doesn't matter what node ## \nu ## we are considering, we will always have the same ## y ## scalar in the equation? However, there is another equation above (shown below) which uses y as follows. This suggests that ##y## is a vector because then we have matrix-vector multiplication:

Screen Shot 2022-05-03 at 11.03.14 AM.png

Case if ## y ## is a vector:
- It could be a vector (as suggested by image above), but then we are adding a vector ## (1 - \alpha) y ## to a scalar ## \alpha S f ## is a vector, and we are extracted the value at a certain node ## \nu ##, so it is a scalar. Therefore, it seems unlikely that ## y ## is a vector unless my interpretation of ## \nu ## is incorrect.Apologies if this is sparse with information. I didn't want to rewrite the paper in this post and I am unsure of some of the definitions of variables in there. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
##f## and ##y## are functions of ##v##, where ##v## designates a vertex, ##S## an operator, ##\alpha## a positive scalar.

For a given set of vertices ##V##, it is possible to write ##f## and ##y## as a vector over the set of vertices, and ##S## as a matrix.

Note that ##y## can't be a scalar otherwise eq. (2.15) would represent the sum of disparate elements.
 
DrClaude said:
##f## and ##y## are functions of ##v##, where ##v## designates a vertex, ##S## an operator, ##\alpha## a positive scalar.

For a given set of vertices ##V##, it is possible to write ##f## and ##y## as a vector over the set of vertices, and ##S## as a matrix.

Note that ##y## can't be a scalar otherwise eq. (2.15) would represent the sum of disparate elements.
Many thanks for the response!

So would ## f( \nu ) ## be a vector instead of just referring to the entry of vector ## f## corresponding to ## \nu ##?
 
Master1022 said:
So would ## f( \nu ) ## be a vector instead of just referring to the entry of vector ## f## corresponding to ## \nu ##?
I don't understand your question.

##f(v)## is a function, but if you have a discrete set ##V## of vertices ##v##, then ##f(v)## over ##V## can be written as a vector.
 
I have been insisting to my statistics students that for probabilities, the rule is the number of significant figures is the number of digits past the leading zeros or leading nines. For example to give 4 significant figures for a probability: 0.000001234 and 0.99999991234 are the correct number of decimal places. That way the complementary probability can also be given to the same significant figures ( 0.999998766 and 0.00000008766 respectively). More generally if you have a value that...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
536
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
6K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
944
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K