If we take starting nodes for traversing the graph at random, even if we take a weighted sample, could still accidentally grab a node that is off on a very low frequency or erroneous offshoot path.
By taking all nodes with >= 3, we always enable the option to take the better of the two or more adjacent paths
Possibly consider taking a weighted subset of these hub nodes, rather than taking all of them. But by taking all of them, we get a good way of indexing the graph completely
can explore by:
weighted walk forward from A until we find a hub node or find B
weighted walk forward from B until we find a hub node or find A
use the pre-calculated shortest path from A to B
can either stop there for a possibly, but not necessarily guaranteed, shortest path
Can continue shortest path searches from A and B UP UNTIL they are equal to or longer than the precalculated route from hub to hub, then we'll know for sure which is the shortest
If we take starting nodes for traversing the graph at random, even if we take a weighted sample, could still accidentally grab a node that is off on a very low frequency or erroneous offshoot path.
By taking all nodes with >= 3, we always enable the option to take the better of the two or more adjacent paths
Possibly consider taking a weighted subset of these hub nodes, rather than taking all of them. But by taking all of them, we get a good way of indexing the graph completely
can explore by: