Hi Tiago,

From the documentation of deg_sampler: "This function is called once per 
vertex, but may be called more times, if the degree sequence cannot be used to 
build a graph."

Now suppose my deg_sampler sometimes returns values greater than N-1, and if I 
don't want to generate a graph with multi-edges and self-loops, such values 
will be discarded. But suppose for first few vertices, drawn values were less 
than N (and hence are accepted) and the next value is greater than N-1. Now 
will all the values generated so far discarded or only the last value? I feel 
that discarding only the last value will create a bias if I want to sample 
degrees from a particular probability distribution. Could you please clarify 
this?

Thank you
SS


‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, July 23, 2020 2:09 PM, Snehal Shekatkar 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks so much Tiago!
>
> Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Thursday, July 23, 2020 1:35 PM, Tiago de Paula Peixoto [email protected] 
> wrote:
>
> > Am 23.07.20 um 08:31 schrieb Snehal Shekatkar:
> >
> > > Sorry for bothering again. A small query: If the graph size is say
> > > 10^4, and the degrees are drawn from the discrete-power law or some
> > > other right-skewed distribution for which the second moment diverges,
> > > would n_iter = 1000 be enough for the Markov chain to saturate? Is
> > > there a rule of thumb for choosing n_iter when the scaling index of
> > > the power-law and the graph size are given?
> >
> > Unfortunately, there is no known rule of thumb to know how fast the
> > chain mixes. My inclination is to say that 1000 sweeps is often enough,
> > but I would encourage you to experiment and draw your own conclusions.
> >
> > Tiago de Paula Peixoto [email protected]
> > graph-tool mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.skewed.de/mailman/listinfo/graph-tool


_______________________________________________
graph-tool mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.skewed.de/mailman/listinfo/graph-tool

Reply via email to