**Are you an EPFL student looking for a semester project?**

Work with us on data science and visualisation projects, and deploy your project as an app on top of GraphSearch.

Person# Brunella Marta Spinelli

This person is no longer with EPFL

This page is automatically generated and may contain information that is not correct, complete, up-to-date, or relevant to your search query. The same applies to every other page on this website. Please make sure to verify the information with EPFL's official sources.

Related publications (6)

Related research domains (4)

Sensor

A sensor is a device that produces an output signal for the purpose of sensing a physical phenomenon. In the broadest definition, a sensor is a device, module, machine, or subsystem that detects events or changes in its environment and sends the information to other electronics, frequently a computer processor. Sensors are used in everyday objects such as touch-sensitive elevator buttons (tactile sensor) and lamps which dim or brighten by touching the base, and in innumerable applications of which most people are never aware.

Sound localization

Sound localization is a listener's ability to identify the location or origin of a detected sound in direction and distance. The sound localization mechanisms of the mammalian auditory system have been extensively studied. The auditory system uses several cues for sound source localization, including time difference and level difference (or intensity difference) between the ears, and spectral information.

Number

A number is a mathematical object used to count, measure, and label. The original examples are the natural numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and so forth. Numbers can be represented in language with number words. More universally, individual numbers can be represented by symbols, called numerals; for example, "5" is a numeral that represents the number five. As only a relatively small number of symbols can be memorized, basic numerals are commonly organized in a numeral system, which is an organized way to represent any number.

Localizing the source of an epidemic is a crucial task in many contexts, including the detection of malicious users in social networks and the identification of patient zeros of disease outbreaks. The difficulty of this task lies in the strict limitations on the data available: In most cases, when an epidemic spreads, only few individuals, who we will call sensors, provide information about their state. Furthermore, as the spread of an epidemic usually depends on a large number of variables, accounting for all the possible spreading patterns that could explain the available data can easily result in prohibitive computational costs. Therefore, in the field of source localization, there are two central research directions: The design of practical and reliable algorithms for localizing the source despite the limited data, and the optimization of data collection, i.e., the identification of the most informative sensors. In this dissertation we contribute to both these directions. We consider network epidemics starting from an unknown source. The only information available is provided by a set of sensor nodes that reveal if and when they become infected. We study how many sensors are needed to guarantee the identification of the source. A set of sensors that guarantees the identification of the source is called a double resolving set (DRS); the minimum size of a DRS is called the double metric dimension (DMD). Computing the DMD is, in general, hard, hence estimating it with bounds is desirable. We focus on G(N,p) random networks for which we derive tight bounds for the DMD. We show that the DMD is a non-monotonic function of the parameter p, hence there are critical parameter ranges in which source localization is particularly difficult.
Again building on the relationship between source localization and DRSs, we move to optimizing the choice of a fixed number K of sensors. First, we look at the case of trees where the uniqueness of paths makes the problem simpler. For this case, we design polynomial time algorithms for selecting K sensors that optimize certain metrics of interest. Next, turning to general networks, we show that the optimal sensor set depends on the distribution of the time it takes for an infected node u to infect a non-infected neighbor v, which we call the transmission delay from u to v. We consider both a low- and a high-variance regime for the transmission delays. We design algorithms for sensor placement in both cases, and we show that they yield an improvement of up to 50% over state-of-the-art methods.
Finally, we propose a framework for source localization where some sensors (called dynamic sensors) can be added while the epidemic spreads and the localization progresses. We design an algorithm for joint source localization and dynamic sensor placement; This algorithm can handle two regimes: offline localization, where we localize the source after the epidemic spread, and online localization, where we localize the source while the epidemic is ongoing. We conduct an empirical study of offline and online localization and show that, by using dynamic sensors, the number of sensors we need to localize the source is up to 10 times less with respect to a strategy where all sensors are deployed a priori. We also study the resistance of our methods to high-variance transmission delays and show that, even in this setting, using dynamic sensors, the source can be localized with less than 5% of the nodes being sensors.

, ,

When an epidemic spreads in a given network of individuals or communities, can we detect its source using only the information provided by a small set of nodes? We propose a general framework that incorporates two dimensions. First, we can either rely exclusively on a set of selected nodes (i.e., sensors) which always reveal their state independently of any particular epidemic (these are called static), or we can add some sensors (called dynamic) as an epidemic spreads, depending on which additional information is required. Second, the method can either localizes the source after an epidemic has spread through the entire network (offline), or while the epidemic is ongoing (online). We empirically study the performance of offline and online localization both with and without dynamic sensors. Our analysis shows that, by using dynamic sensors, the number of sensors necessary to localize the source is reduced by up to a factor of 10 and that, even with high-variance transmission delays, the source can be localized by using fewer than 5% of the nodes as sensors.

2017Patrick Thiran, Laura Elisa Celis, Brunella Marta Spinelli

Source localization, the act of finding the originator of a disease or rumor in a network, has become an important problem in sociology and epidemiology. The localization is done using the infection state and time of infection of a few designated sensor nodes; however, maintaining sensors can be very costly in practice. We propose the first online approach to source localization: We deploy a priori only a small number of sensors (which reveal if they are reached by an infection) and then iteratively choose the best location to place new sensors in order to localize the source. This approach allows for source localization with a very small number of sensors; moreover, the source can be found while the epidemic is still ongoing. Our method applies to a general network topology and performs well even with random transmission delays.

2017