The use of random regular networks was motivated by their surprisingly good ... performance and fault-tolerance measures of interest ..... A graphical tool to fa-.
Æ ! " #$ " " " "
!
"
#
$ % & ' () *+ ,
" ! !
! " # " " $ Æ" " % & ' % " & # # ! ( $& & )* !% ½
% "
- !
!
2
!
,
Æ
6
?+
(>4+ 3 (>+ 9 (>@+
9 2 3 (@+
4
4
;
(A+ 1
"
B
F 4G? AG)
7
!
6 !
C
!
1 C
3.1. Generating Random Regular Networks
0 !
6
$
&
"
=
0
-
6
'( ! '(
C #
% >
A >@
" $ = # > 5EE9," : @5?9'
@E4)
>@ ! H !
!
"
+ > + + = + D
,+ +
!
!
-+ .+ + + + + + + ,+ +
C
%
D >
D E
**I % ./ "
(>5+
3.2. The Filtering Process !
#
C
! " >
0 ! !
% !
6
!
#
0.040 degree 8
0.030
Filter 1
0.025
degree 6
0.020
Filter 2
0.010
E2 C2 U
C=C1 C2 C 3
degree 3
0.005 0
50
100 150 200 Number of nodes
250
300
Filter 3
E3 C3 E C
Figure 1. Average runtime of the generation algorithm
E3
E2
E1
degree 4
0.015
0
E1 C1
Evaluation part Checking part
Figure 2. Sequential and Parallel Filtering
- !
! !
!
!
U
Average Runtime (sec)
0.035
!
! ! !
!
!
! ! 2 7 C
2
% ! 5I
! ! Æ
!
!
!
4.1. The Diameter Filter
!
J
! !
# @
!
!
"
!
(4 >3+ 0
"
# # 4
"
" ) @5?
" , 9 2
9 2
3 ?
1 9 2 !
# " >EEE
"
>
½
½ % 4
# 3
"
! #
! $ # 5
4
3
3
!
# 3
!
!
10
1.0
degree 3
0.8
8
Diameter ( ∆ )
8
Diameter ( ∆ )
9 degree 4
7
degree 5
6
6
0.6
Min. Diameter count
4
0.4
2
0.2
5 degree 6
4 3
0
2 0
50
100
150 200 Number of nodes
250
300
Figure 3. Diameter of random regular networks
0
20
40
60 80 Number of nodes
100
120
0 140
Figure 5. Frequency of minimum diameter random networks of degree 3
14 # 4
Diameter ( ∆ )
12
"
10
8
6
Shuffle Exchange Network Cube Connected Cycles Chordal Ring of degree 3 Moebius Graphs Random Networks of degree 3 Multi Tree Structures
4 2
" 9 (3+ (5 ?+
0 0
20
40
60
80 100 120 Number of Nodes
140
160
Figure 4. Diameters of different networks of degree 3
180
#
J
¾
>
½ % # % " / * 0 ! "1 ¾ 2 34 " $! "$ 0 $ $ % 3 5 6
Fraction of the generated graphs
Min. Diameter
10
>
$
>EE
2"
;
;
" ?4 4 5 5
' K
=
" ?4
>E
3
@
@
4 # 3 #
>5
4
@
3
@E
3
3
4
C
AE
3
5
?
3?4
4
5
?
53@
5
5
?
A4E
4
?
A
Table 1. Comparison of diameter between best known networks and the best of the random networks generated in our experiments
Figure 6. Example of edges that can be removed to accomodate a new node
"
"
# A
=
"
! >EI
# 3
"
E E5
@
>
4.3. The Fault-Tolerance Filter
1
= 9
C
6
0 !
J
"
0.8 Diameter (∆)
Fraction of input graphs
1
0.6 0.4 0.2 0
0
0.1
0.2 0.3 Diameter increase
0.4
0.5
(>>+ "
0
0 " ?4 3 4 "
Diameter (∆)
64-node shuffle 64-node CCC 64-node chordal ring of degree 3 Moebius graph of order 6 64-node random network of degree 3 64-node MTS graph of degree 3 0
0.05
16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4
0
0.05 0.10
# )
0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 Probability of link failure
0.35
0.40
(b) Comparison among degree 4 networks
3 4 3
0.25
16 x 4 mesh torus 8 x 8 mesh torus 64-node chordal ring of degree 4 4-D wrapped butterfly 64-node random network of degree 4
!
4
0.10 0.15 0.20 Probability of link failure
(a) Comparison among degree 3 networks
Figure 7. Cumulative frequency of the increase in diameter for random networks of size 64 and degree 3
15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5
Figure 8. Diameter vs. probability of link failure
# * >> 3
4
$
%
,
&
!
! ! 6
7
!
Max. connected component size (χmax)
Average Distance (D)
6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 64-node shuffle 64-node CCC 64-node chordal ring of degree 3 Moebius graph of order 6 64-node random network of degree 3 64-node MTS graph of degree 3
4.5 4.0 3.5
0
0.05
0.10 0.15 0.20 Probability of link failure
0.25
Probability of disconnection ( π d)
0.5
63 62.5 62 64-node shuffle 64-node CCC 64-node chordal ring of degree 3 Moebius graph of order 6 64-node random network of degree 3 64-node MTS network of degree 3
61.5 61 60.5 60
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
Figure 11. Maximum component size vs. probability of link failure
64-node MTS graph of degree 3 64-node random network of degree 3 Moebius graph of order 6 64-node chordal ring of degree 3 64-node CCC 64-node shuffle
0.6
63.5
Probability of link failure
Figure 9. Average node-pair distance vs. probability of link failure
0.7
64
!
! L " ?4 4 !
! ! ! A !
0.4
0.3
! J ! !
0.2
(E E E @+ 7 >EEE %
0.1
!
0
0
0.05
0.10 0.15 Probability of link failure
0.20
0.25
33I D33E
!
Figure 10. Probability of disconnection vs. probability of link failure
