Transcript On the Structure Properties of Massive Telecom Graphs

SNAzzy
[A Social Network Analysis Suite for Business Intelligence]
Telecom Research & Innovation Centre
IBM Research, India
TriC
© 2010 IBM Corporation
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
The Setting
 In Mobile Telecom markets
– Competition is ever-increasing
• New players
• Lower Average Revenue Per User (ARPU)
– Customer “churn”
• Low barriers to switching providers
– Especially in Pre-paid segment
– Customer acquisition  customer retention
 Telecoms must rely on business intelligence
– Design the right incentives
– Adopt right marketing strategies
TriC
2
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications
July 20, 2015
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
The Setting
 Telecom business analytics typically
– Analyse only individual customer behaviour
– “microscopic view”
 Analysing call-graphs
– “who-calls-whom” graph
• People are the vertices
• If two people call each other, there is an edge between their corresponding vertices
– How is everyone connected with each other ?
– “telescopic view”
– May yield major business insights complementary
to traditional mining
Telescopic view
• Is the graph made up of many small islands ?
• High pagerank (social value) can be used in computing
customer value
TriC
3
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications
July 20, 2015
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
Data Sources / Preprocessing
 The study was done for intra-region calls, and does not include long distance
or international calls.
 For two of the regions, we collected all the calls made in a week, and for the
other two, we collected all the calls made in a month.
 Further, very short duration calls (less than 10 seconds) have been ignored
as missed calls and wrong calls since they may yield incorrect results.
 Multiple calls between any two user or nodes is treated as a single edge.
TriC
4
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications
July 20, 2015
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
Structural Properties
 Degree distributions
– All parameters quite close
– Very few vertices with high in / out degree
– Easier to target
TriC
5
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications
July 20, 2015
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
Structural Properties
 Degree correlations
– Single vertex IN-OUT correlation
•
Indegree, outdegree correlated upto a point
•
Beyond that, high outdegree could be salesmen
•
High indegree micro businesses or highly influential people ?
TriC
6
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications
July 20, 2015
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
Shape of call-graphs
 “Bow-Tie” analysis
– For all regions, the SCC was much bigger than the IN and OUT regions
• For WWW, the sizes are nearly the same
– 44 million, 56 million (SCC), 44 million
– The “Bow-Tie” model does not fit our graphs
– Perhaps, another vertex distribution
based model
– Instead, we found that an edge
distribution based model
characterises our graphs better
124801
266894
755592
TriC
7
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications
July 20, 2015
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
Shape of call-graphs
Entry
SCC
Exit
Edge induced subgraphs
TriC
8
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications | CIKM
November 8, 2006
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
Shape of call-graphs
Instead, we found that an edge distribution based model characterises our graphs better
TriC
9
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications | CIKM
November 8, 2006
India Research Lab | Telecom Research Innovation Centre
Shape of call-graphs
 Finding the shape can be helpful in many ways
– Word-of-mouth advertising might work, since the graph is connected
– For a new service rollout, the vertices in the Entry and In-Tunnel zones might qualify as
better starting points
TriC
– This provides another way to segment customers
10
On the Structure of Massive Telecom Graphs: Findings and Implications
July 20, 2015
IBM Research, India
Churn Prediction & Analysis
 SNAzzy constructs an influence propagation model:
– Given persons who churned (initial churners)
– Diffuse their influence into their social environment
C1
*
I
– Thus, their friends are at a larger churn risk..
(The two C1s churn; N does not, since not enough influence)
I
*
– And this propagates to some of their friends’ friends as well.
(C2 affected due to indirect, cumulative influence)
*
 Output
N
– List of predicted churners
C1
 Business Value
C2
– Unique model
• Captures higher order social effects
• Capture the effect of multiple churners on a subscriber
–
–
–
–
TriC
Does not require profile information.
Can be applied in post-paid and pre-paid markets as well.
Once the model is created, it can be run quickly and often.
Complements traditional churn models.
Telecom Research Innovation Centre
July 20, 2015
Influence spreading
Indirect influence
I
Initial churners (known)
C
Predicted churners
11
© 2010 IBM Corporation
IBM Research, India
Churn Prediction & Analysis – SNAzzy Lift
60
50
(from real Telecom case study)
40
SNAzzy lift = 5
30
20
DT1 – Usage only
SPA
DT-3
DT-2
DT-1
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
DT2 – Usage + Connectivity
50
60
DT3 – Usage + Connectivity + Interconnectivity
Percentage of Subscribers
 SNAzzy churn model leverages
– Usage features: call frequency, call volume, calling neighbors, incoming/outgoing calls etc.
– Connectivity features: calls to/from churner neighbors (friends), percentage of churner friends etc.
– Interconnectivity features: e.g. fraction of churner friends who are in turn connected between themselves
TriC
Telecom Research Innovation Centre
July 20, 2015
12
© 2010 IBM Corporation
IBM Research, India
Behaviour of Communities and its Members
 Does the behaviour of community members differ from people who do
not belong to communities?
 Do community members behave differently towards fellow community
members than others?
 Is the behaviour of community members different in different
communities?
 How do communities behave collectively?
13
© 2009 IBM Corporation
IBM Research, India
Does the behaviour of community members differ from
people who do not belong to communities?
• Community members more active than those who are not community members
• Call duration of community members is shorter than for non-community members
• But call frequency is much higher, and hence the average talk time is similar
14
© 2009 IBM Corporation
IBM Research, India
Do community members behave differently towards
fellow community members than others?
• Community members use SMS more with fellow community members
• Call duration of with fellow community members is shorter
• But call frequency is much higher, and also the average talk time is much higher
15
© 2009 IBM Corporation
IBM Research, India
Do people behave differently in different communities?
Town
Metro
• Average call duration is similar across communities
• But the SMS and call frequency are very different
16
© 2009 IBM Corporation
IBM Research, India
Communities introduce shortcuts in Social Networks
17
© 2009 IBM Corporation
IBM Research, India
SNAzzy Papers
 “On the Structural Properties of Massive Telecom Call Graphs: Findings and Implications”
ACM CIKM 2006.
 “Analyzing the Structure and Evolution of Massive Telecom Graphs”
IEEE TKDE, 2008.
 “Social Ties and their Relevance to Churn in Mobile Telecom Networks”
EDBT, 2008.
 “Large Maximal Cliques Enumeration in Large Sparse Graphs”
COMAD, 2009.
 “Leveraging Social Networks for Corporate Staffing and Expert Recommendation”
IBM Systems Journal, 2010.
 “Discovery and Analysis of Tight-Knit Communities in Telecom Social Networks”,
IBM Journal of R&D, 2010.
 "Like-minded Communities: Bringing the Familiarity and Similarity Together”,
WISE 2012.
 “Viral Marketing for Product Cross-sell through Social Networks”,
ECML-PKDD 2012.
TriC
Telecom Research Innovation Centre
July 20, 2015
18
© 2010 IBM Corporation
SNAzzy
IBM Research, India
Thank you! 
Contact:
Natwar Modani ([email protected])
Amit A. Nanavati ([email protected])
© 2010 IBM Corporation
IBM Research, India
Some Terminology
 CC: Collection of edges where both ends, that is, the originator and the
receiver of the communication, belong to the same community.
 CG minus CC: Edges where the originator of the communication
belongs to a given community, and the receiver either belongs to one or
more different communities or does not belong to any community at all.
 CG: Union of CC and CG minus CC.
 GC minus CC: Edges where the receiver of the communication belongs
to a given community, and the originator either belongs to one or more
different communities or does not belong to any community at all.
 GC: Union of CC and GC minus CC.
 GG minus any C: Edges where neither the originator nor the receiver of
the communication for any given edge belongs to any community.
 HD40: Edges where either the originator or the receiver of the
communication for any given edge has a minimum degree of 40.
20
© 2009 IBM Corporation