PERBANDINGAN WAKTU EKSEKUSI DAN PENGGUNAAN MEMORI PADA PAKET GRAFIK PYTHON UNTUK ANALISIS JARINGAN

Wildan Nadiyal Ahsan, NIM.: 20206052011 (2024) PERBANDINGAN WAKTU EKSEKUSI DAN PENGGUNAAN MEMORI PADA PAKET GRAFIK PYTHON UNTUK ANALISIS JARINGAN. Masters thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (PERBANDINGAN WAKTU EKSEKUSI DAN PENGGUNAAN MEMORI PADA PAKET GRAFIK PYTHON UNTUK ANALISIS JARINGAN) 20206052011_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (3MB) | Preview
	Text (PERBANDINGAN WAKTU EKSEKUSI DAN PENGGUNAAN MEMORI PADA PAKET GRAFIK PYTHON UNTUK ANALISIS JARINGAN) 20206052011_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (5MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Graph-based data analysis is a prevalent method employed across various domains. Some popularly used graph packages such as NetworkX, igraph, NetworKit and graph-tool are examples of packages available for the Python programming language. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. This research aims to compare the performance (in terms of execution time) and memory usage of several popular graph packages, namely NetworkX, Networkit, SNAP, graph-tool, igraph and rustworkX. The research employed an experimental quantitative method. The datasets used for simulating the network analysis by applying co-occurance network was 10.000 article titles gathered from several journals indexed by scopus. The results shown that the mean value ± margin of error (at level of confidence: 0.95 and number of samples/number of experiment iterations (n): 35) for the execution time of graph-tool = 1.30291731 ± 0.268629749 second (s), networkX = 2.07304831 ± 0.672788959 (s), networkit = 1.44051549 ± 0.272388017 (s), snap = 0.92104769 ± 0.126535737 (s), igraph = 1.63668983 ± 0.621590572 (s), rustworkx = 1.33403117 ± 0.190636021 (s). Meanwhile, the mean ± margin of error for the current memory usage of graph-tool = 2.023255971 ± 0.115873399 MegaByte (MB) networkX = 5. 1896566 ± 2.431315437 (MB), networkit = 6.207405857 ± 4.225013008 (MB), snap = 3.743473629 ± 1.080429925 (MB), igraph = 4.461298114 ± 1.20858089 (MB), rustworkx = 4.267859943 ± .....(MB); and the mean ± margin of error for peak memory usage of graph-tool = 3.402223457 ± 0.017638869 MegaByte (MB), networkX = 5.630388457 ± 2.813189597 (MB), networkit = 7.048138886 ± 4.996092409 (MB), snap = 4.120006486 ± 1.288241414 (MB), igraph = 4.825449429 ± 1.47061189 (MB), rustworkx = 4.621915486 ± 1.130673792 (MB). The results of repeated measures ANOVA and Friedman test for the execution time, current memory usage and peak memory usage shown that there is significant difference among these mean values. Therefore, it can be concluded that the order of the performance based on execution time (from fastest to slowest) is: 1.snap 2.graph-tool & rustworkx 3.networkit & igraph 4.networkX. Meanwhile, the order of the efficiency based on the current memory usage and peak memory usage (from most efficient to most inefficient) is: 1.graph-tool 2.snap 3. rustworkX 4.igraph 5.networkX 6.networkit. There was a moderate and positive correlation between execution time and memory usage. Further, there was a very strong and positive between current memory and peak memory usage.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item