Modelling structural zeros in compositional data

This analysis was stimulated by the real data analysis problem of household expenditure data. The full dataset contains expenditure data for a sample of 1224 households. The expenditure is broken down at 2 hierarchical levels: 9 major levels (e.g. housing, food, utilities etc.) and 92 minor levels. There are also 5 factors and 5 covariates at the household level. Not surprisingly, there are a small number of zeros at the major level, but many zeros at the minor level. The question is how best to model the zeros. Clearly, models that try to add a small amount to the zero terms are not appropriate in general as at least some of the zeros are clearly structural, e.g. alcohol/tobacco for households that are teetotal. The key question then is how to build suitable conditional models. For example, is the sub-composition of spending excluding alcohol/tobacco similar for teetotal and non-teetotal households? In other words, we are looking for sub-compositional independence. Also, what determines whether a household is teetotal? Can we assume that it is independent of the composition? In general, whether teetotal will clearly depend on the household level variables, so we need to be able to model this dependence. The other tricky question is that with zeros on more than one component, we need to be able to model dependence and independence of zeros on the different components. Lastly, while some zeros are structural, others may not be, for example, for expenditure on durables, it may be chance as to whether a particular household spends money on durables within the sample period. This would clearly be distinguishable if we had longitudinal data, but may still be distinguishable by looking at the distribution, on the assumption that random zeros will usually be for situations where any non-zero expenditure is not small. While this analysis is based on around economic data, the ideas carry over to many other situations, including geological data, where minerals may be missing for structural reasons (similar to alcohol), or missing because they occur only in random regions which may be missed in a sample (similar to the durables)

On optimal computation of MPLS label binding for multipoint-to-point connections

Most network operators have considered reducing Label Switched Routers (LSR) label spaces (i.e. the number of labels that can be used) as a means of simplifying management of underlaying Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) and, hence, reducing operational expenditure (OPEX). This letter discusses the problem of reducing the label spaces in Multiprotocol Label Switched (MPLS) networks using label merging - better known as MultiPoint-to-Point (MP2P) connections. Because of its origins in IP, MP2P connections have been considered to have tree- shapes with Label Switched Paths (LSP) as branches. Due to this fact, previous works by many authors affirm that the problem of minimizing the label space using MP2P in MPLS - the Merging Problem - cannot be solved optimally with a polynomial algorithm (NP-complete), since it involves a hard- decision problem. However, in this letter, the Merging Problem is analyzed, from the perspective of MPLS, and it is deduced that tree-shapes in MP2P connections are irrelevant. By overriding this tree-shape consideration, it is possible to perform label merging in polynomial time. Based on how MPLS signaling works, this letter proposes an algorithm to compute the minimum number of labels using label merging: the Full Label Merging algorithm. As conclusion, we reclassify the Merging Problem as Polynomial-solvable, instead of NP-complete. In addition, simulation experiments confirm that without the tree-branch selection problem, more labels can be reduced

Label Space Reduction in MPLS Networks: How Much Can A Single Stacked Label Do?

Most network operators have considered reducing LSR label spaces (number of labels used) as a way of simplifying management of underlaying virtual private networks (VPNs) and therefore reducing operational expenditure (OPEX). The IETF outlined the label merging feature in MPLS-allowing the configuration of multipoint-to-point connections (MP2P)-as a means of reducing label space in LSRs. We found two main drawbacks in this label space reduction a)it should be separately applied to a set of LSPs with the same egress LSR-which decreases the options for better reductions, and b)LSRs close to the edge of the network experience a greater label space reduction than those close to the core. The later implies that MP2P connections reduce the number of labels asymmetrically