Suppose a graph data structure is used to represent social media relationships. Each node represents a user, and a directed edge exists between user A and user B if user A follows user B. Let's further define a notion of influence. We say that use A is influened by user B if there is a path of "follow" relationships from user A to user B. So if user A follows user B, then A is influenced by user B. If B also follows user C, then user A is also influenced by user C since there is a directed path A-B-C.

If the primary use of this graph is to query if one user is influenced by another, which graph data structure would be more efficient in terms of the time required to complete the query?

Question

Suppose a graph data structure is used to represent social media relationships.  Each node represents a user, and a directed edge exists between user A and user B if user A follows user B.  Let's further define a notion of influence.  We say that use A is influened by user B if there is a path of "follow" relationships from user A to user B.  So if user A follows user B, then A is influenced by user B.  If B also follows user C, then user A is also influenced by user C since there is a directed path A->B->C.

If the primary use of this graph is to query if one user is influenced by another, which graph data structure would be more efficient in terms of the time required to complete the query?

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

When evaluating reachability queries (whether A can influence B via a directed path), the choice between an adjacency list and an adjacency matrix centers on how quickly you can answer such queries.
Option 1: Adjacency List. This representation is very space-efficient for sparse graphs, since you store only existing edges. However, answering a reachability query like “is there a path from A to B?” typically requires a graph search (BFS or DFS) starting at A, which runs in time proportional to the size of the explored portion: O(V + E) in the worst case. If you have many such queries, you may end up paying this cost repeatedly, especially in large, sparse networks where V and E can be large.
Option 2: Adjacency Matrix. An adjacency matrix stores a direct edge presence for every pair of nodes in a dense grid of V x V booleans. On its own, it doesn’t immediately yield reachability, but if you compute the transitive closure (for example, via Floyd-Warshall or repeated BFS/DFS to fill a reachability matrix) you can answer each reachability query in O(1) time after preprocessing. The trade-off is higher space usage, O(V^2), and an upfront preprocessing cost, but once the closure is computed, any query about whether a path exists between two nodes becomes a constant-time lookup.
In the context of “queries about whether one user is influenced by another,” if the workload consists of many reachability checks and preprocessing time is acceptable, the adjacency matrix with a transitive closure is often preferable for faster query latency. The adjacency list would incur more latency per query unless you amortize many searches, especially as the network grows.
Thus, the core distinction is that adjacency lists excel in space and dynamic edge updates for individual edge existence, while adjacency matrices (with closure precomputed) optimize the speed of repeated reachability queries at the expense of space and preprocessing time.

XLMC0202501 Topic 20 Quiz

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

Graph ADT_5 For a given graph g : We are implementing the following graph using the data structure shown below: adj = { 'u': {'v': 'e', 'w': 'g'}, 'v': {'u': 'e', 'w': 'f'}, 'w': {'u': 'g', 'v': 'f', 'z': 'h'}, 'z': {'w': 'h'}} This graph is implemented using an Adjacency Matrix representation.

Consider a graph G with n nodes and m edges, where n >> m (i.e. G is a sparse graph). Assume we want to be able to quickly find all the neighbors of a given node in G. Which of the following representations for this graph would support this operation in the most computationally efficient way?

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler