# Constant Factor Approximation Algorithm for the Knapsack Median Problem

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

## Transcription

1 Constant Factor Approximation Algorithm for the Knapsack Median Problem Amit Kumar Abstract We give a constant factor approximation algorithm for the following generalization of the k-median problem. We are given a set of clients and facilities in a metric space. Each facility has a facility opening cost, and we are also given a budget B. The objective is to open a subset of facilities of total cost at most B, and minimize the total connection cost of the clients. This settles an open problem of Krishnaswamy-Kumar-Nagarajan-Sabharwal-Saha. The natural linear programming relaxation for this problem has unbounded integrality gap. Our algorithm strengthens this relaxation by adding constraints which stipulate which facilities a client can get assigned to. We show that after suitably modifying a fractional solution, one can get rich structural properties which allow us to get the desired approximation ratio. 1 Problem Definition The problem of locating facilities to service a set of demands has been widely studied in computer science and operations research communities [LMW98, MF90]. The trade-off involved in such problems is the following we would like to open as few facilities as possible, but the clients should not be located too far from the nearest facility. The k-median problem balances the two costs as follows : we are given a set D of clients and a set F of potential facilities lying in a metric space. The goal is to open at most k facilities in F so that the average distance traveled by a client in D to the nearest open facility is minimized. The k-median problem is one of the most wellstudied facility location problems with several constant factor approximation algorithms [AGK + 01, CG99, CGTS02, JV01]. Motivated by applications in content distribution networks, Hajiaghayi et al. [HKK10] considered the following generalization of the k-median problem, which they called the Red-Blue Median Problem the set of facilities are partitioned into two sets F 1 and F 2, and we are given two parameters k 1 and k 2. The goal is to open at most k 1 facilities of F 1 and Dept. of Computer Science and Engg., IIT Delhi, India , k 2 facilities of F 2 such that the total connection cost of the clients is minimized. They gave a constant factor approximation algorithm for this problem. Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN + 11] generalized this result to the case of arbitrary number of partitions of F. In fact, their result holds even when the set of open facilities is required to be an independent set in a matroid (the matroid median problem). They show that the natural linear programming relaxation for this problem has constant integrality gap. In this paper, we consider the following problem. As in the k-median problem, we are given a set of clients D and facilities F in a metric space. Each client j has an associated demand d j, each facility i has a facility opening cost f i and we are given a budget B. The goal is to open a set of facilities such that their total opening cost is at most B, and minimize the total connection cost of the clients, i.e., j D d jc(i(j), j), where i(j) is the facility to which j gets assigned, and c denotes the distance in the underlying metric space. We call this the Knapsack Median Problem. Clearly, the k- median problem is a special case of this problem where all facilities costs are one, and B = k. In this paper, we give a constant factor approximation algorithm for the Knapsack Median Problem. This answers an open question posed by [KKN + 11]. The main difficulty here lies in the fact the natural LP relaxation has unbounded integrality gap. This happens even when all facility costs are at most B (the natural LP relaxation for the knapsack problem also has unbounded integrality gap, but it becomes a constant if we remove all items of size more than the knapsack capacity). Consider the LP relaxation given in Section 3 where x(i, j) is 1 if client j is assigned to facility i, and y i is 1 if facility i gets opened. The following integrality gap example was given by Charikar and Guha [CG05] : there are two facilities of cost 1 and B respectively, and two clients (with unit demand) co-located with the two facilities respectively. The distance between the two facilities is a large number D. Clearly, any integral solution can open only one facility, and so must pay D, whereas the optimal fractional solution can open the expensive facility to an extent of 1 1 B, and so the total

2 cost will be D B. Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN+ 11] showed that the integrality gap remains unbounded even if we strengthen the LP relaxation by adding knapsack-cover inequalities. One idea of getting around this problem would be to augment the LP relaxation with more information. Suppose we guess the maximum distance between a client and the facility to which it gets assigned in an optimal solution call this value L. In the LP relaxation, we can set x(i, j) to 0 if c(i, j) > L. This would take care of the above integrality gap example if we set L to be a value less than D, the LP becomes infeasible, and if L > D, we already have D as a lower bound because we have guessed that at least one demand has connection cost at least D in the optimal solution. But now, consider the same example as above where we have D clients located at each of the two facilities respectively. Now, any integral solution will have cost at least D 2, and even if we plug in L > D, the LP can get away with value D2 B only. The lower bound of D is also not enough. Therefore, we need a more subtle way of coming up with a lower bound which looks at groups of clients rather than a single client. We show that, based on a guess of the value of the optimal solution, one can come up with lower bounds U j for each client j, and set x(i, j) to 0 in the LP relaxation if d(i, j) > U j. Further these lower bounds are better than what one can obtain by just looking at client j alone. Our rounding algorithm, which closely follows that of Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN + 11], shows that the natural LP relaxation (where we use the bounds U j as mentioned) has constant integrality gap except for one group of demands. Our algorithm assigns this group of demands to a single open facility and the connection cost can be bounded by the value of the optimal solution (if our guess for this value is correct). Note that the actual constant in the approximation ratio turns out to be large, and we have not made an attempt to get the optimal value of this constant by balancing various parameters. 1.1 Related Work The k-median problem has been extensively studied in the past and several constant factor approximation algorithms are known for this problem. Lin and Vitter [LV92] gave a constant factor approximation algorithm for this problem while opening at most k(1 + ε) facilities for an arbitrarily small positive constant ε, even when distances do not obey triangle inequality. Assuming that distances obey triangle inequality, the first constant factor approximation algorithm was given by Charikar et al. [CGTS02]. Jain and Vazirani [JV01] gave a primal-dual constant factor approximation algorithm for this problem. Their algorithm first gives a primal-dual algorithm for the facility location problem which has the Lagrange multiplier preserving property (see e.g. [Mes07]). However, their algorithm does not extend to our problem. Indeed, if we use their approach, then we would get two solutions one of these would open facilities which cost less than the budget B and the other one would spend more than B. Since facilities have non-uniform costs, the idea of combining these two solutions using a randomized algorithm does not seem to work here. There are several approximation algorithms based on local search techniques as well [KPR98, AGK + 01]. Hajiaghayi et al. [HKK10] used this approach to get a constant factor approximation algorithm for the case of red-blue median problem recall that here there are two kinds of facilities (red and blue), and for each kind, we have a bound on the number of facilities that can be opened. Each operation in these local search algorithms swaps only one facility at a time. Since facilities have costs, we may need to open and close multiple facilities in each operation. It remains a challenge to analyze such a local search algorithm. Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN + 11] gave a constant factor approximation algorithm for the matroid median problem. Here, the set of open facilities should form an independent set in a given matroid. A natural special case (and in fact, this captures many of the ideas in the algorithm) is when the set of facilities is partitioned into K groups, and we are given an upper bound on the number of open facilities of each group. They show that the natural LP relaxation has constant integrality gap. Their algorithm begins by using ideas inherent in the algorithm of Charikar et al. [CGTS02], but has more subtle details. In fact, they also give a constant factor approximation for the Knapsack Median Problem, but exceed the budget B by the maximum cost of any facility. Our rounding algorithm also proceeds along the same lines as the latter algorithm, but the presence of the non-uniform bounds U j allow us to avoid exceeding the budget B. There are several bi-criteria approximation algorithms for the Knapsack Median Problem which violate the budget by (1 + ε)-factor for any ε > 0, and come within a constant of the total connection cost [LV92, CG05]. As mentioned above, Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN + 11] also gave a constant factor approximation algorithm for this problem while violating the budget by at most the maximum cost of a facility. 1.2 Our Techniques Consider the natural linear programming relaxation given in Section 3. As explained in the previous section,

3 the integrality gap of this relaxation is unbounded. Now, suppose we know (up to a constant factor) the value of the optimal solution call this OPT (we can do this by binary search). Based on this guess, we can come up with a bound U j for each client j as follows. Suppose j is a assigned to a facility i where c(i, j) is at least a parameter U j. Then any other client j must be assigned to a facility i satisfying c(i, j ) U j c(j, j ) distance away from it (otherwise we can improve the connection cost of j). Hence, we can deduce that j D d j max(0, U j c(j, j )) OPT. We set U j to be the highest value which satisfies this condition. In the LP relaxation, we set x(i, j) to 0 if c(i, j) > U j. We now briefly describe the rounding algorithm. It proceeds along the same lines as that of Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN + 11], but we give the details for the sake of completeness. Consider a fractional solution (x, y) to the LP relaxation. For a client j, the fractional solution assigns it fractionally to several facilities. Let (j) = i F c(i, j)x(i, j) denote the average distance to the facilities to which j gets fractionally assigned. Using the ideas in [CGTS02], we can assume (with constant loss in approximation ratio) that the distance between two different clients j and j is at least a large constant times max( (j), (j )). This is achieved by merging several clients into a new client whose demand is the sum of demands of these clients. Let B(j) denote the ball of radius 2 (j) around client j. It is easy to check by a simple averaging argument that at least half of demand of j is assigned to facilities in B(j). Also, these balls are disjoint (in fact, far from each other). For each client j, we define another ball E(j) it is the set of facilities which are closer to j than to other clients. Clearly, the balls E(j) are disjoint, and it is easy to check that B(j) is a subset of E(j) (see Figure 1). Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN + 11] showed that, up to a constant loss in approximation ratio, a fractional solution can be massaged to have the following structure : A client j is fractionally assigned to facilities in E(j) and the facilities in at most one of the balls B(j ), for some client j. We can construct a directed graph G as follows the set of vertices is same as the set of clients, and we have an arc (j, j ) if j is fractionally assigned to a facility in B(j ). This graph has the nice property that each of its components is a directed star where the root is either a single vertex or a 2-cycle. Once we have established these properties, we write a new linear programming relaxation which enforces such properties. This is similar to the new linear programming relaxation in [KKN + 11]. For the case of the matroid median problem, they showed that this new relaxation is totally unimodular and so they could directly recover a good integral solution from such a relaxation. For the case of Knapsack Median Problem, they used the iterative rounding method. They showed that as long as there are more than two facilities, one can always find a facility which is integrally open or closed in a vertex solution. When there are only two facilities, they just open both the facilities thus violating the budget constraint. For us, this is precisely where the presence of the bounds U j helps. However, instead of giving an algorithm based on iterative rounding (which would require finding several vertex solutions), we show that one can directly argue about a vertex solution to this new LP relaxation. We show that in a vertex solution, all facilities are integrally open except for the facilities in the set E(j) for at most two special clients j. One can easily account for the connection cost of all the clients except for these special clients. We connect these special clients to any open facility to which they were fractionally assigned in the LP solution. Now, note that such a client was perhaps obtained by merging several clients of D in the beginning of the rounding procedure, and so the connection cost of j really corresponds to the connection cost of several clients. We would like to bound the connection cost of all of these clients by the optimal value. This is where we use the property of the upper bounds U j for clients j D. In Section 2, we formally define the problem. In Section 3, we give the LP relaxation and define the bounds U j for each client j. We first describe how to massage a fractional solution to make it well-structured in Section 4.1 as mentioned earlier, this is same as the algorithm of Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN + 11], though the notation is slightly different. In Section 4.2, we write a new LP relaxation, which is again based on [KKN + 11], which actually enforces such a structure. Then we show that any vertex solution to this relaxation is almost integral, and so one can get a constant factor approximation algorithm. 2 Preliminaries We are given a set of clients D and a set of potential facilities F. Further, these points lie in a metric space, where we denote the distance between two points i and j by c(i, j). Each facility i has a facility opening cost f i, and we are given a budget B. Each client j D has an associated value d j, which denotes the amount of demand it has. Therefore, an instance I can be described by a tuple (D, F, c, f, d). A solution opens a subset of facilities F of total cost at most the budget B, and assigns each client in D to the closest open facility

4 (in the set F ). The objective is to minimize the total connection cost, i.e., min j D d j c(i(j), j), where i(j) is the facility to which j gets assigned. In rest of the paper, we shall use i to refer to a facility and j to refer to a client. 3 LP Relaxation Fix an instance I = (D, F, c, f, d). We have the following LP relaxation, which we call LP(I). Here, x(i, j) is 1 iff client j is assigned to facility i, and y i is 1 iff facility i is opened. The first constraint states that a client must be assigned to a facility, and the second constraint states that if a client is assigned to a facility, then the facility must be open. The third constraint requires that we do not exceed the budget B. min d j c(i, j)x(i, j) j D i F x(i, j) = 1 for all j D i F x(i, j) y i f i y i B i F x(i, j), y i 0 for all i F, j D As argued above, this relaxation may have unbounded integrality gap. So we need to strengthen the relaxation. Suppose we know the value of the optimal solution call it OPT(I) (we can guess this up to a factor (1 + ε) for an arbitrarily small constant ε by binary search). Among all the open facilities in the optimal solution, a client should be assigned to the closest one. So, if a client j is assigned to a facility i, then any other client j must be assigned to a facility i such that c(i, j ) c(i, j) c(j, j ) away from j. Indeed, otherwise we might as well assign j to i and reduce the total connection cost. So, the cost of the solution must be at least j D d j max(0, c(i, j) c(j, j )). If this value turns out to be greater than OPT(I), we know that the optimal solution cannot assign j to i. Thus, for each client j, we define a bound U j as the maximum value for which d j max(0, U j c(j, j )) OPT(I). j D For a client j, we define the set of allowable facilities, A(j), as the set of those facilities i such that c(i, j) U j. Hence, we can make the following modification to LP(I) : we set x(i, j) to 0 if i / A(j). We emphasize that even with this modification, the integrality gap of the LP could be unbounded. However, if our guess of OPT(I) is correct, then the cost of the solution produced by our algorithm can be bounded by the LP value except for one group of demands. For these group of clients, we show that their connection cost is at most a constant times j D d j max(0, U j c(j, j )) for some client j, and hence, is at most O(OPT(I)). 4 Rounding a fractional solution We start with a fractional solution (x, y) to LP(I). There are several conceptual steps in the rounding algorithm. First, we modify the fractional solution through a sequence of steps to a new fractional solution which has a much cleaner structure as mentioned earlier, this is same as that of [KKN + 11]. Using this structure, we write a new LP relaxation for the problem. Finally, we show that a vertex solution of this new LP relaxation turns out to have some nice properties which can be exploited for rounding it to an integral solution. 4.1 Modifying the LP solution (i) Consolidating clients : In this step (which is also used by Charikar et al. [CGTS02]), we shall merge some of the clients into a single client. We shall do this formally by updating the demands d j of the clients. The new demand of a client j will be denoted by d (1) j. Initially, d (1) j = d j for all j. For a client j, let (j) denote i c(i, j)x(i, j), the fractional distance traveled by j. Consider the clients in increasing order of the (j) values let this ordering be j 1,...,j n. When we consider j l, if there exists a client j u, u < l, such that d (1) j u we increase d (1) j u by d jl, and set d (1) j l > 0 and c(j l, j u ) 4 (j l ), then to 0. In other words, we move j l to j u and merge the two demands. Let D (1) denote the new set of clients with non-zero demands. The following observations are easy to check. Fact 4.1. [CGTS02] If j 1, j 2 D (1), then c(j 1, j 2 ) 4 max( (j 1 ), (j 2 )). Further, d (1) j (j) d j (j). j D (1) j D (ii) Consolidating facilities : For a client j D (1), define B(j) as the ball of radius 2 (j) around j. Fact 4.1 shows that these balls are disjoint. It is also easy to see, using a simple averaging argument, that y i 1/2. i B(j) We define a new solution (x (1), y (1) ) as follows. For each client j, we perform the following steps : let i be the cheapest facility in B(j). We open a new facility cen(j)

5 at the same location as j. The facility opening cost of cen(j) is same as that of i. We close all the facilities in B(j), and set y (1) cen(j) to be equal to min(1, i B(j) y i). In other words, we are moving all the facilities in B(j) to cen(j). It is easy to check that the total facility opening cost does not increase. We need to change the variables x(i, j ) as well. We set x (1) (i, j ) to 0 if i B(j) \ {cen(j)} for some j, and correspondingly increase x (1) (cen(j), j ). In other words, for every pair of clients j and j, we define x (1) (cen(j), j ) = i B(j) x(i, j). Thus, the only open facility inside a ball B(j) is the facilitycen(j). Let F (1) be the set of facilities with nonzero y (1) i values these will either be cen(j) for some client j, or the facilities in F which did not lie in any of the balls B(j). Again, it is easy to check the following fact. Fact 4.2. For any j D (1), y (1) cen(j) 1/2. Further, if x(i, j) > 0 for some i B(j ), j D (1), then c(cen(j ), j) 2c(i, j). Hence, the cost of the solution (x (1), y (1) ) is at most twice that of (x, y). Proof: Fix a client j. The connection cost of j to facilities in B(j) only decreases because c(j, cen(j)) = 0. Now, suppose j was assigned to a facility i B(j ) in the solution (x, y). In the new solution, it will get assigned by the same extent to cen(j ). Observe that c(cen(j ), j) c(i, j ) + c(i, j). Now, c(i, j ) 2 (j ), and c(i, j) c(j, j ) c(i, j ) Fact (4.1) 4 (j ) 2 (j ) = 2 (j ). So, c(i, j ) c(i, j), and hence, c(cen(j ), j) 2c(i, j). (iii) Updating the assignment : We further simplify the assignment of clients to facilities. This will create a new solution (x (2), y (2) ), where y (2) will be same as y (1). For a client j D (1), let near(j) be the closest client in the set D (1) \{j}. Let E(j) be the ball of radius c(j, near(j))/2 around j. Note that by definition, the balls E(j), j D (1), are disjoint. Further, B(j) E(j) because the radius of B(j) is 2 (j), whereas that of E(j) is at least 2 (j) (Fact 4.1). We now modify the solution such that a client j is fractionally assigned to E(j) B(j) j cen(j ) cen(j ) Figure 1: The dark circle around j denotes B(j), and the lighter one denotes E(j). The arrows indicate fractional assignment of j to the facilities. The arrow pointing back to j denotes fractional assignment of j to cen(j). facilities in either E(j) or cen(near(j)). In other words, if i / E(j), we set x (2) (i, j) = 0 and set x (2) (cen(near(j)), j) = x (1) (i, j). i/ E(j) Note that this is a feasible solution because y cen(j ) 1/2 for all j, and at most half of fractional assignment of j goes outside E(j) (because x (1) (cen(j), j) 1/2). Thus, a client j is fractionally assigned to cen(j), some facilities in E(j) \ B(j), and to at most one facility outside E(j), namely, cen(near(j)). We shall often refer to the assignment of j to a facility outside E(j) (right now, this can be only cen(near(j))) as a long range assignment. See Figure 1 for a pictorial representation of this. Again, it is easy to check the following fact. Fact 4.3. For a client j, if x (1) (i, j) > 0 for some i / E(j), then c(cen(near(j)), j) 2c(i, j). Hence, the cost of (x (2), y (2) ) is at most twice that of (x (1), y (1) ). Proof: Suppose i / E(j). Then, c(i, j) c(cen(near(j)), j)/2. (iv) Simplifying the long range assignments We define a new solution (x (3), y (3) ) which is initially same as (x (2), y (2) ). Consider the following directed graph G, which we call the long range assignment graph. The set of vertices V is same as D (1), and we have a directed arc from j to j if we have long range assignment from j to cen(j ) (this implies that j is the closest client to j). We change the long range assignments of clients so that this graph has a simple structure. Since the out-degree of each vertex in G is at most one, each component of G is an in-directed tree where the root is either a single vertex or a 2-cycle (it is possible that the root is a larger cycle, but we can always break ties while defining the closest client such that it becomes a 2-cycle). In case

6 Figure 2: The left figure shows the structure of G each component is a directed tree with the root being a single node or a 2-cycle. The right figure shows the structure of G after Step (iv). Each component is a directed star with the root being a single node or a 2-cycle. the root is a 2-cycle, we shall call the vertices in it as pseudo-roots (see Figure 2). For a non (pseudo-)root vertex v, we denote its parent as parent(v). We now carry out the following two steps [KKN + 11] : We traverse each tree in G bottom-up from leaves to (pseudo-)root, and if we encounter a pair of nodes u, v, where v = parent(u), such that v is a not the root or a pseudo-root, and c(u, v) 2c(v, parent(v)), then we remove the arc (v,parent(v)) and add the arc (v, u) (so these two vertices become a pseudo-root). For each component of the graph G, we perform the following changes. If j is a node which is not the root (or one of the pseudo-roots), then we remove the arc (j, parent(j)) and add an arc from j to the root (or the closer pseudo-root). Notice that all nodes in this component, except the root (or the pseudo-roots), become leaves. Thus, each component is a star where the root is either a single node or a 2-cycle (right part of Figure 2). In terms of the actual assignment, if we had an arc (j, j ) in G, and the new out-going arc from j is (j, j ), then we set x (3) (cen(j ), j) to 0 and x (3) (cen(j ), j)) to x (2) (cen(j ), j). Lemma 4.1. Consider a client j, and suppose j is the root or one of the pseudo-roots of the component containing j. Then, c(cen(j ), j) 6c(cen(near(j)), j). Thus, the cost of (x (3), y (3) ) is at most 6 times that of (x (2), y (2) ). Proof: Consider the first set of operations above. We only introduce 2-cycles here. Further, if we replace an arc (j,near(j)) by (j, j ), then c(j, j ) 2c(j,near(j)). This proves the lemma when j is a pseudo-root. Now, consider the graph at the end of the first set of operations. Let j be a vertex which is not a root or pseudo-root vertex. let r be the root (or the closer pseudo-root) of the component containing j. In the path from j to r, the length of the arcs decrease by a factor of at least 2. So, c(j, r) 2c(j,parent(j)), where parent(j) is same as near(j). Now, suppose this component has another pseudo-root r. We argued above that c(r, r ) 2c(r,near(r)) and so, c(r, r ) 2c(r, j). So, c(j, r ) c(j, r) + c(r, r ) 3c(j, r) 6c(j, parent(j)) = 6c(j, near(j)). Summary : We now summarize the properties of the solution (x (3), y (3) ). We have a set of client D (1) and a set of facilities F (1). For each client j, we have a facility cen(j) co-located with j, and y (3) cen(j) 1/2. The distance between any two clients j and j is at least 4 max( (j), (j ). For each client j, we have two sets : B(j), the ball of radius 2 (j) around j; and E(j), the ball of radius c(j, near(j))/2 around j, where near(j) is the closest client to j. Clearly, E(j) contains B(j) and for two different clients j and j, E(j) and E(j ) are disjoint. The only (fractionally) open facility in B(j) is cen(j), and x (3) (cen(j), j) 1/2. Further, j may be fractionally assigned to some facilities in E(j) \ B(j), and to at most one other facility outside the set E(j). The latter facility is of the form cen(j ) for some client j (by a long range assignment) in this case, we have an arc (j, j ) in G. The directed graph G consists of a set of stars, where the root of each star is either a single node or a 2-cycle. In the initial fractional solution (x, y), a client j is assigned to a facility in its allowable set A(j) only. However, the solutions constructed by modifying x may violate this assumption. We now show that this condition is still satisfied approximately.

7 Lemma 4.2. Suppose j is a client in D (1). If x (3) (i, j) > 0, then there is a facility i A(j) for which c(i, j) 24 c(i, j). Proof: Fix a client j. In step (i), we do not change any assignments of j. In step (ii), Fact 4.2 shows that if we assign j fractionally to i, c(i, j) 2c(i, j), where i A(j). Fact 4.3 and Lemma 4.1 similarly show that the same condition holds, but the factor worsens to = A new LP formulation Consider the instance I consisting of clients D (1) with demands d (1) j and facilities F (1). Recall that we have introduced new facilities, cen(j), j D (1), and the the facility opening cost of such a facility is same as that of the cheapest facility in B(j). Further, for all clients j D (1), we remove any facility i E(j) for which x (3) (i, j) = 0. If a client j D (1) has an out-neighbor in G, we shall denote it by out(j). For a client j, let comp(j) denote the component of G containing it. For a component C of G, let R(C) denote the set of (pseudo- )roots of C if C has just one root, then R(C) is a singleton set containing this element; otherwise R(C) consists of the two pseudo-roots of C. We shall denote two pseudo-roots of the same component as pseudoroot pairs. For a component C, let E(R(C)) denote j R(C) E(j) the facilities which belong to E(j), where j is a root or a pseudo-root of C. We write a new LP relaxation for the instance I below call this relaxationlp (I ). Note that this LP relaxation was also given by Krishnaswamy et al. [KKN + 11]. (4.1) (4.2) (4.3) (4.4) i E(j) i E(R(C)) min d (1) j j D (1) i E(j) c(i, j)y i +c(j, out(j)) 1 y i 1 j D (1) i E(j) y i 1 components C of G f i y i B i y i 0 i y i Note that for a demand j, the term in the objective function containing out(j) is present only if j has an out-neighbor in G. Note that if a component C of G has only one root j, then constraints (4.2) and (4.3) corresponding to j imply that these should be satisfied with equality. The following claim follows from Facts 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, Lemma 4.1 and the observation that y (3) ) is a feasible solution to LP (I ) (with the same cost as the cost of the solution (x (3), y (3) ) for the original LP relaxation). Fact 4.4. The optimal value of LP (I ) is at most 24 OPT(LP(I)). In this section, we shall prove the following theorem. Theorem 4.1. There is a polynomial time algorithm to find a (integral) solution to the instance I whose cost is at most 2700 OPT(I). Using the theorem, we get the main result. For a client j D (1), let D(j) denote the set of clients in D which were merged with j in step (i) of the algorithm described in Section 4.1. Corollary 4.1. There is a polynomial time algorithm to find a solution to the instance I of cost at most 2706 OPT(I). Proof: Consider the solution S to the instance I as guaranteed by Theorem 4.1. If S opens a facility cen(j) for some j D (1), we open the cheapest facility in B(j). Clearly, this does not change the facility opening cost. This may increase the connection cost by j D (1) d(1) j 2 (j). We can express this increase in the cost as 2 d j (j) 2 d j (j ) = 2 OPT(LP(I)). j D (1) j D(j) j D Now, the clients j D(j) also pay the extra distance from j to j, which is at most d j 4 (j ). So, we pay an extra 4 OPT(LP(I)). The result now follows from Theorem 4.1. We now prove Theorem 4.1. First, we state the main technical lemma which shows that a vertex solution to LP (I ) has nice properties. Lemma 4.3. Any vertex solution y to LP (I ) has the following property. There is either a client j or a pseudo-root pair (j, j ), such that yi is either 0 or 1 for all i E(j), except perhaps when j = j in the former case and j = j, j in the latter case. Further, in the latter case the inequality (4.3) for the component containing this pair is satisfied with equality. Proof: Fix a vertex solution y. We say that a facility i is fractionally open in this solution if y i is strictly

8 between 0 and 1. We define two sets A and B. The set A will contain clients or pseudo-root pairs. A client j gets added to A if i E(j) y i = 1 and E(j) contains fractionally open facilities. Similarly, a pseudo-root pair (j, j ) gets added to A if i E(j) y i + i E(j ) y i = 1 and both E(j) and E(j ) contains fractionally open facilities. Note that in either of the two cases, E(j) (or E(j) E(j )) must contain at least two fractionally open facilities. Given a client j (or pseudo-root pair (j, j )) in A, and a small parameter ε, define an operation T ε (j) (or T ε ((j, j ))) as follows : there exist two fractionally open facilities in E(j) (or E(j) E(j )) call these i 1 and i 2 respectively. This operation changes yi 1 to yi 1 + ε and yi 2 to yi 2 ε. Note that this maintains feasibility of all constraints for a small enough but non-zero ε (which could be negative), except perhaps constraint (4.4) which changes by ε(f i1 f i2 ). The set B contains those clients j for which E(j) contains a fractionally open facility and j has not been added to A either as a single element or as part of a pseudo-root pair. So, i E(j) y i < 1, and if j is one of the pseudo-roots of comp(j), then i E(R(comp(j))) y i > 1. Given a parameter ε and a client j B, define an operation T ε (j) as follows : let i be a fractionally open facility in E(j). Then change yi to yi + ε it is easy to check that for small enough non-zero ε (which could be negative), this maintains feasibility of all constraints except perhaps (4.4) which changes by ε f i. Now suppose A B has at least two elements, say j and j (if any these elements is a pseudo-root pair, then the argument is identical). Then perform the operations T ε (j) and T ε (j ) we can choose ε and ε, where at least one of them is non-zero, such that the left hand side of inequality (4.4) does not change. Also note that switching the signs of ε and ε also does not violate any of the constraints. This contradicts the fact that we are at a vertex solution. So, A B can have cardinality at most 1. This proves the lemma. We now prove two useful claims. The first claim below shows how to handle a client which does not satisfy the statement of Lemma 4.3. Claim 4.1. Suppose j is a client in D (1) such that x (3) (i, j) > 0 for some facility i. Then, d (1) j c(i, j) 250 OPT(I). Proof: Consider j and i as above. Lemma 4.2 shows that there is a facility i A(j) such that c(i, j) 24 c(i, j). Let D(j) denote the clients in D which were merged with j. Divide D(j) into two sets (i) D 1 (j) : those clients j D(j) for which c(j, j ) c(i, j)/2, and (ii) D 2 (j) : the remaining clients in D(j). If j D 2 (j), then c(i, j ) c(j, j ) + c(i, j) c(j, j ) + 24 c(i, j) c(j, j ) + 48 c(j, j ) 200 (j ), where the last inequality follows because c(j, j ) 4 (j ) (this is the reason why j was merged with j). Thus, we can pay for the connection cost of clients in D 2 (j). Now, if j D 1 (j), then observe that c(i, j) 2(c(i, j) c(j, j )). Hence, j D 1 (j) d j c(i, j) j D 1 (j) j D 1 (j) 48 OPT(I), d j c(i, j) d j (c(i, j) c(j, j )) where the last inequality follows because c(i, j) U j. This proves the claim. Claim 4.2. Suppose (j 1, j 2 ) is arc in G, and let j 2 be the pseudo-root other than j 2 in this component (if it exists). Let i E(j 1 ) E(j 2 ). Then c(i, j 1 ) 9c(j 1, j 2 ). Proof: If i E(j 2 ), then c(i, j 1 ) c(i, j 2 )+c(j 1, j 2 ) c(j 1,j 2) 2 +c(j 1, j 2 ) = 3 2 c(j 1, j 2 ). The case when i E(j 2 ) follows similarly (using Lemma 4.1). We are now ready to prove the main theorem. Proof of Theorem 4.1: Consider a vertex solution y to LP (I ) with properties as stated in Lemma 4.3. We first show which facilities to open. We open all facilities for which yi = 1. Now, consider the fractionally open facilities. Lemma 4.3 implies that all these facilities are either in E(j ) for some client j or in E(j ) E(j ) for some pseudo-root pair (j, j ). Suppose the first case happens. If i E(j ) y i = 1, then open the cheapest facility in E(j) note that this does not increase the budget constraint. Similarly, if the second case happens, then open the cheapest facility in E(j ) E(j ). It remains to check the assignment cost of clients. First observe that for any component C, constraint (4.3) states that we open at least one facility in E(R(C)). Now consider a client j. If yi = 1 for some i E(j), then we have opened this facility, and in the objective function of LP (I ), we also pay for its connection cost. If yi = 0, then the fractional solution y pays d (1) j c(j,out(j)). Note that out(j) is one of the pseudo-roots of comp(j). We also know we open a facility i E(R(comp(j))). We assign j to this facility

9 i. Claim 4.2 implies that we pay at most 9 times what the fractional solution pays for this demand. Now suppose E(j) contains a fractionally open facility. Lemma 4.3 shows that two options are possible : (i) j is the only client for which E(j) contains a fractionally open facility, or (ii) (j, j ) form a pseudoroot pair of a component C and i E(R(C)) y i = 1. Further, j and j are the only clients for which the set E(j) contains a fractionally open facility. Consider case (i) first. First assume that j is the root of comp(j). Then, we have opened a facility i in E(j). Lemma 4.3 shows that its connection cost is at most 250 OPT(I). Now suppose either j is a leaf or one of the pseudo-roots. Since we always open a facility in E(R(comp(j))), Lemma 4.3 and Claim 4.2 show that the assignment cost of j is at most OPT(I) = 2250 OPT(I). Now, suppose case (ii) as above happens. We need to worry about the connection cost of j and j. Since i E(j) y i + i E(j ) y i = 1, one of the two summands is at most 1/2 suppose it is j. Then the LP objective function pays at least 1/2 d (1) j c(j, j ). We know that we have opened a facility i E(j) E(j ). Claim 4.2 shows that the assignment cost of j is at most 9 d (1) j c(j, j ), and hence, at most 18 times the contribution from the LP objective function. For j, Lemma 4.3 and Claim 4.2 show that the assignment cost of j is at most OPT(I) = 2250 OPT(I). So, the total assignment cost of all the clients is at most 18 LP (I ) OPT(I), which is at most 2700 OPT(I) (using Fact 4.4). algorithm for the k-median problem. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 65(1): , [HKK10] MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi, Rohit Khandekar, and Guy Kortsarz. Budgeted red-blue median and its generalizations. In ESA (1), pages , [JV01] Kamal Jain and Vijay V. Vazirani. Approximation algorithms for metric facility location and k-median problems using the primal-dual schema and Lagrangian relaxation. J. ACM, 48(2): , [KKN + 11] Ravishankar Krishnaswamy, Amit Kumar, Viswanath Nagarajan, Yogish Sabharwal, and Barna Saha. The matroid median problem. In ACM/SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages , [KPR98] Madhukar R. Korupolu, C. Greg Plaxton, and Rajmohan Rajaraman. Analysis of a local search heuristic for facility location problems. In ACM/SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 1 10, [LMW98] R. F. Love, J. G. Morris, and G. O. Wesolowsky. Facilities Location: Models and Methods. North- Holland, New York, NY, [LV92] Jyh-Han Lin and Jeffrey Scott Vitter. epsilonapproximations with minimum packing constraint violation (extended abstract). In ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages , [Mes07] Julián Mestre. Lagrangian relaxation and partial cover. CoRR, abs/ , [MF90] P. Mirchandani and R. Francis. Discrete Location Theory. Wiley, New York, NY, Acknowledgments The author would like to thank the anonymous referee whose suggestions helped in simplifying the algorithm. References [AGK + 01] Vijay Arya, Naveen Garg, Rohit Khandekar, Adam Meyerson, Kamesh Munagala, and Vinayaka Pandit. Local search heuristic for k-median and facility location problems. In ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 21 29, [CG99] Moses Charikar and Sudipto Guha. Improved combinatorial algorithms for the facility location and k- median problems. In IEEE Foundations of Computer Science, pages , [CG05] Moses Charikar and Sudipto Guha. Improved combinatorial algorithms for facility location problems. SIAM J. Comput., 34(4): , [CGTS02] Moses Charikar, Sudipto Guha, Éva Tardos, and David B. Shmoys. A constant-factor approximation

### A constant-factor approximation algorithm for the k-median problem

A constant-factor approximation algorithm for the k-median problem Moses Charikar Sudipto Guha Éva Tardos David B. Shmoys July 23, 2002 Abstract We present the first constant-factor approximation algorithm

### ! Solve problem to optimality. ! Solve problem in poly-time. ! Solve arbitrary instances of the problem. #-approximation algorithm.

Approximation Algorithms 11 Approximation Algorithms Q Suppose I need to solve an NP-hard problem What should I do? A Theory says you're unlikely to find a poly-time algorithm Must sacrifice one of three

### Approximation Algorithms

Approximation Algorithms or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Deal with NP-Completeness Ong Jit Sheng, Jonathan (A0073924B) March, 2012 Overview Key Results (I) General techniques: Greedy algorithms

### ! Solve problem to optimality. ! Solve problem in poly-time. ! Solve arbitrary instances of the problem. !-approximation algorithm.

Approximation Algorithms Chapter Approximation Algorithms Q Suppose I need to solve an NP-hard problem What should I do? A Theory says you're unlikely to find a poly-time algorithm Must sacrifice one of

### Lecture 7: Approximation via Randomized Rounding

Lecture 7: Approximation via Randomized Rounding Often LPs return a fractional solution where the solution x, which is supposed to be in {0, } n, is in [0, ] n instead. There is a generic way of obtaining

### Applied Algorithm Design Lecture 5

Applied Algorithm Design Lecture 5 Pietro Michiardi Eurecom Pietro Michiardi (Eurecom) Applied Algorithm Design Lecture 5 1 / 86 Approximation Algorithms Pietro Michiardi (Eurecom) Applied Algorithm Design

### 2.3 Scheduling jobs on identical parallel machines

2.3 Scheduling jobs on identical parallel machines There are jobs to be processed, and there are identical machines (running in parallel) to which each job may be assigned Each job = 1,,, must be processed

Approximation Algorithms Chapter Approximation Algorithms Q. Suppose I need to solve an NP-hard problem. What should I do? A. Theory says you're unlikely to find a poly-time algorithm. Must sacrifice one

### LOCAL SEARCH HEURISTICS FOR k-median AND FACILITY LOCATION PROBLEMS

SIAM J. COMPUT. Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 544 562 c 2004 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics LOCAL SEARCH HEURISTICS FOR k-median AND FACILITY LOCATION PROBLEMS VIJAY ARYA, NAVEEN GARG, ROHIT KHANDEKAR,

### Lecture 3: Linear Programming Relaxations and Rounding

Lecture 3: Linear Programming Relaxations and Rounding 1 Approximation Algorithms and Linear Relaxations For the time being, suppose we have a minimization problem. Many times, the problem at hand can

### The Goldberg Rao Algorithm for the Maximum Flow Problem

The Goldberg Rao Algorithm for the Maximum Flow Problem COS 528 class notes October 18, 2006 Scribe: Dávid Papp Main idea: use of the blocking flow paradigm to achieve essentially O(min{m 2/3, n 1/2 }

### Fairness in Routing and Load Balancing

Fairness in Routing and Load Balancing Jon Kleinberg Yuval Rabani Éva Tardos Abstract We consider the issue of network routing subject to explicit fairness conditions. The optimization of fairness criteria

### K-median Algorithms: Theory in Practice

K-median Algorithms: Theory in Practice David Dohan, Stefani Karp, Brian Matejek Submitted: January 16, 2015 1 Introduction 1.1 Background and Notation The k-median problem has received significant attention

### Improved Algorithms for Data Migration

Improved Algorithms for Data Migration Samir Khuller 1, Yoo-Ah Kim, and Azarakhsh Malekian 1 Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. Research supported by NSF Award

### A simpler and better derandomization of an approximation algorithm for Single Source Rent-or-Buy

A simpler and better derandomization of an approximation algorithm for Single Source Rent-or-Buy David P. Williamson Anke van Zuylen School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Cornell University,

### Approximation Algorithms: LP Relaxation, Rounding, and Randomized Rounding Techniques. My T. Thai

Approximation Algorithms: LP Relaxation, Rounding, and Randomized Rounding Techniques My T. Thai 1 Overview An overview of LP relaxation and rounding method is as follows: 1. Formulate an optimization

### The multi-integer set cover and the facility terminal cover problem

The multi-integer set cover and the facility teral cover problem Dorit S. Hochbaum Asaf Levin December 5, 2007 Abstract The facility teral cover problem is a generalization of the vertex cover problem.

### 11. APPROXIMATION ALGORITHMS

11. APPROXIMATION ALGORITHMS load balancing center selection pricing method: vertex cover LP rounding: vertex cover generalized load balancing knapsack problem Lecture slides by Kevin Wayne Copyright 2005

### Lecture 4 Online and streaming algorithms for clustering

CSE 291: Geometric algorithms Spring 2013 Lecture 4 Online and streaming algorithms for clustering 4.1 On-line k-clustering To the extent that clustering takes place in the brain, it happens in an on-line

### 8.1 Min Degree Spanning Tree

CS880: Approximations Algorithms Scribe: Siddharth Barman Lecturer: Shuchi Chawla Topic: Min Degree Spanning Tree Date: 02/15/07 In this lecture we give a local search based algorithm for the Min Degree

### Offline sorting buffers on Line

Offline sorting buffers on Line Rohit Khandekar 1 and Vinayaka Pandit 2 1 University of Waterloo, ON, Canada. email: rkhandekar@gmail.com 2 IBM India Research Lab, New Delhi. email: pvinayak@in.ibm.com

### Week 5 Integral Polyhedra

Week 5 Integral Polyhedra We have seen some examples 1 of linear programming formulation that are integral, meaning that every basic feasible solution is an integral vector. This week we develop a theory

### A Near-linear Time Constant Factor Algorithm for Unsplittable Flow Problem on Line with Bag Constraints

A Near-linear Time Constant Factor Algorithm for Unsplittable Flow Problem on Line with Bag Constraints Venkatesan T. Chakaravarthy, Anamitra R. Choudhury, and Yogish Sabharwal IBM Research - India, New

### Scheduling Home Health Care with Separating Benders Cuts in Decision Diagrams

Scheduling Home Health Care with Separating Benders Cuts in Decision Diagrams André Ciré University of Toronto John Hooker Carnegie Mellon University INFORMS 2014 Home Health Care Home health care delivery

### Scheduling Shop Scheduling. Tim Nieberg

Scheduling Shop Scheduling Tim Nieberg Shop models: General Introduction Remark: Consider non preemptive problems with regular objectives Notation Shop Problems: m machines, n jobs 1,..., n operations

### Min-cost flow problems and network simplex algorithm

Min-cost flow problems and network simplex algorithm The particular structure of some LP problems can be sometimes used for the design of solution techniques more efficient than the simplex algorithm.

### Minimum Makespan Scheduling

Minimum Makespan Scheduling Minimum makespan scheduling: Definition and variants Factor 2 algorithm for identical machines PTAS for identical machines Factor 2 algorithm for unrelated machines Martin Zachariasen,

### Good luck, veel succes!

Final exam Advanced Linear Programming, May 7, 13.00-16.00 Switch off your mobile phone, PDA and any other mobile device and put it far away. No books or other reading materials are allowed. This exam

### Approximated Distributed Minimum Vertex Cover Algorithms for Bounded Degree Graphs

Approximated Distributed Minimum Vertex Cover Algorithms for Bounded Degree Graphs Yong Zhang 1.2, Francis Y.L. Chin 2, and Hing-Fung Ting 2 1 College of Mathematics and Computer Science, Hebei University,

### The Conference Call Search Problem in Wireless Networks

The Conference Call Search Problem in Wireless Networks Leah Epstein 1, and Asaf Levin 2 1 Department of Mathematics, University of Haifa, 31905 Haifa, Israel. lea@math.haifa.ac.il 2 Department of Statistics,

### 2.3 Convex Constrained Optimization Problems

42 CHAPTER 2. FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS IN CONVEX OPTIMIZATION Theorem 15 Let f : R n R and h : R R. Consider g(x) = h(f(x)) for all x R n. The function g is convex if either of the following two conditions

### max cx s.t. Ax c where the matrix A, cost vector c and right hand side b are given and x is a vector of variables. For this example we have x

Linear Programming Linear programming refers to problems stated as maximization or minimization of a linear function subject to constraints that are linear equalities and inequalities. Although the study

### Planar Tree Transformation: Results and Counterexample

Planar Tree Transformation: Results and Counterexample Selim G Akl, Kamrul Islam, and Henk Meijer School of Computing, Queen s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6 Abstract We consider the problem

### CSL851: Algorithmic Graph Theory Semester I Lecture 1: July 24

CSL851: Algorithmic Graph Theory Semester I 2013-2014 Lecture 1: July 24 Lecturer: Naveen Garg Scribes: Suyash Roongta Note: LaTeX template courtesy of UC Berkeley EECS dept. Disclaimer: These notes have

### Permutation Betting Markets: Singleton Betting with Extra Information

Permutation Betting Markets: Singleton Betting with Extra Information Mohammad Ghodsi Sharif University of Technology ghodsi@sharif.edu Hamid Mahini Sharif University of Technology mahini@ce.sharif.edu

### Answers to some of the exercises.

Answers to some of the exercises. Chapter 2. Ex.2.1 (a) There are several ways to do this. Here is one possibility. The idea is to apply the k-center algorithm first to D and then for each center in D

### CSC2420 Fall 2012: Algorithm Design, Analysis and Theory

CSC2420 Fall 2012: Algorithm Design, Analysis and Theory Allan Borodin November 15, 2012; Lecture 10 1 / 27 Randomized online bipartite matching and the adwords problem. We briefly return to online algorithms

### CMSC 858T: Randomized Algorithms Spring 2003 Handout 8: The Local Lemma

CMSC 858T: Randomized Algorithms Spring 2003 Handout 8: The Local Lemma Please Note: The references at the end are given for extra reading if you are interested in exploring these ideas further. You are

### LOCAL SEARCH HEURISTICS FOR FACILITY LOCATION PROBLEMS VINAYAKA PANDIT

LOCAL SEARCH HEURISTICS FOR FACILITY LOCATION PROBLEMS VINAYAKA PANDIT DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI JULY 2004 c Indian Institute of Technology Delhi

### Analysis of Approximation Algorithms for k-set Cover using Factor-Revealing Linear Programs

Analysis of Approximation Algorithms for k-set Cover using Factor-Revealing Linear Programs Stavros Athanassopoulos, Ioannis Caragiannis, and Christos Kaklamanis Research Academic Computer Technology Institute

### Minimize subject to. x S R

Chapter 12 Lagrangian Relaxation This chapter is mostly inspired by Chapter 16 of [1]. In the previous chapters, we have succeeded to find efficient algorithms to solve several important problems such

### Data Caching in Networks with Reading, Writing and Storage Costs

Data Caching in Networks with Reading, 1 Writing and Storage Costs Himanshu Gupta Computer Science Department Stony Brook University Stony Brook, NY 11790 Email: hgupta@cs.sunysb.edu Bin Tang Computer

### Lecture 15 An Arithmetic Circuit Lowerbound and Flows in Graphs

CSE599s: Extremal Combinatorics November 21, 2011 Lecture 15 An Arithmetic Circuit Lowerbound and Flows in Graphs Lecturer: Anup Rao 1 An Arithmetic Circuit Lower Bound An arithmetic circuit is just like

### A class of on-line scheduling algorithms to minimize total completion time

A class of on-line scheduling algorithms to minimize total completion time X. Lu R.A. Sitters L. Stougie Abstract We consider the problem of scheduling jobs on-line on a single machine and on identical

### Online Algorithms for Network Design

Online Algorithms for Network Design Adam Meyerson University of California, Los Angeles 3731J Boelter Hall Los Angeles, California 90095 awm@cs.ucla.edu ABSTRACT This paper presents the first polylogarithmic-competitive

### CSL851: Algorithmic Graph Theory Semester I Lecture 4: August 5

CSL851: Algorithmic Graph Theory Semester I 2013-14 Lecture 4: August 5 Lecturer: Naveen Garg Scribes: Utkarsh Ohm Note: LaTeX template courtesy of UC Berkeley EECS dept. Disclaimer: These notes have not

### 1 Polyhedra and Linear Programming

CS 598CSC: Combinatorial Optimization Lecture date: January 21, 2009 Instructor: Chandra Chekuri Scribe: Sungjin Im 1 Polyhedra and Linear Programming In this lecture, we will cover some basic material

### 24. The Branch and Bound Method

24. The Branch and Bound Method It has serious practical consequences if it is known that a combinatorial problem is NP-complete. Then one can conclude according to the present state of science that no

### Minimal Cost Reconfiguration of Data Placement in a Storage Area Network

Minimal Cost Reconfiguration of Data Placement in a Storage Area Network Hadas Shachnai Gal Tamir Tami Tamir Abstract Video-on-Demand (VoD) services require frequent updates in file configuration on the

### Scheduling to Minimize Power Consumption using Submodular Functions

Scheduling to Minimize Power Consumption using Submodular Functions Erik D. Demaine MIT edemaine@mit.edu Morteza Zadimoghaddam MIT morteza@mit.edu ABSTRACT We develop logarithmic approximation algorithms

### Two General Methods to Reduce Delay and Change of Enumeration Algorithms

ISSN 1346-5597 NII Technical Report Two General Methods to Reduce Delay and Change of Enumeration Algorithms Takeaki Uno NII-2003-004E Apr.2003 Two General Methods to Reduce Delay and Change of Enumeration

### Partitioning edge-coloured complete graphs into monochromatic cycles and paths

arxiv:1205.5492v1 [math.co] 24 May 2012 Partitioning edge-coloured complete graphs into monochromatic cycles and paths Alexey Pokrovskiy Departement of Mathematics, London School of Economics and Political

### Algorithm Design and Analysis

Algorithm Design and Analysis LECTURE 27 Approximation Algorithms Load Balancing Weighted Vertex Cover Reminder: Fill out SRTEs online Don t forget to click submit Sofya Raskhodnikova 12/6/2011 S. Raskhodnikova;

Adaptive Online Gradient Descent Peter L Bartlett Division of Computer Science Department of Statistics UC Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94709 bartlett@csberkeleyedu Elad Hazan IBM Almaden Research Center 650

### GRAPH THEORY and APPLICATIONS. Trees

GRAPH THEORY and APPLICATIONS Trees Properties Tree: a connected graph with no cycle (acyclic) Forest: a graph with no cycle Paths are trees. Star: A tree consisting of one vertex adjacent to all the others.

### Ecient approximation algorithm for minimizing makespan. on uniformly related machines. Chandra Chekuri. November 25, 1997.

Ecient approximation algorithm for minimizing makespan on uniformly related machines Chandra Chekuri November 25, 1997 Abstract We obtain a new ecient approximation algorithm for scheduling precedence

### Approximation Algorithms for Data Management in Networks

Approximation Algorithms for Data Management in Networks Christof Krick Harald Räcke Matthias Westermann Abstract This paper deals with static data management in computer systems connected by networks.

### GENERATING LOW-DEGREE 2-SPANNERS

SIAM J. COMPUT. c 1998 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Vol. 27, No. 5, pp. 1438 1456, October 1998 013 GENERATING LOW-DEGREE 2-SPANNERS GUY KORTSARZ AND DAVID PELEG Abstract. A k-spanner

### 5 INTEGER LINEAR PROGRAMMING (ILP) E. Amaldi Fondamenti di R.O. Politecnico di Milano 1

5 INTEGER LINEAR PROGRAMMING (ILP) E. Amaldi Fondamenti di R.O. Politecnico di Milano 1 General Integer Linear Program: (ILP) min c T x Ax b x 0 integer Assumption: A, b integer The integrality condition

### Steiner Tree Approximation via IRR. Randomized Rounding

Steiner Tree Approximation via Iterative Randomized Rounding Graduate Program in Logic, Algorithms and Computation μπλ Network Algorithms and Complexity June 18, 2013 Overview 1 Introduction Scope Related

### Lecture 6 Online and streaming algorithms for clustering

CSE 291: Unsupervised learning Spring 2008 Lecture 6 Online and streaming algorithms for clustering 6.1 On-line k-clustering To the extent that clustering takes place in the brain, it happens in an on-line

### The Approximability of the Binary Paintshop Problem

The Approximability of the Binary Paintshop Problem Anupam Gupta 1, Satyen Kale 2, Viswanath Nagarajan 2, Rishi Saket 2, and Baruch Schieber 2 1 Dept. of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh

### Dynamic programming. Doctoral course Optimization on graphs - Lecture 4.1. Giovanni Righini. January 17 th, 2013

Dynamic programming Doctoral course Optimization on graphs - Lecture.1 Giovanni Righini January 1 th, 201 Implicit enumeration Combinatorial optimization problems are in general NP-hard and we usually

### princeton univ. F 13 cos 521: Advanced Algorithm Design Lecture 6: Provable Approximation via Linear Programming Lecturer: Sanjeev Arora

princeton univ. F 13 cos 521: Advanced Algorithm Design Lecture 6: Provable Approximation via Linear Programming Lecturer: Sanjeev Arora Scribe: One of the running themes in this course is the notion of

### Analysis of Algorithms, I

Analysis of Algorithms, I CSOR W4231.002 Eleni Drinea Computer Science Department Columbia University Thursday, February 26, 2015 Outline 1 Recap 2 Representing graphs 3 Breadth-first search (BFS) 4 Applications

### On the Multiple Unicast Network Coding Conjecture

On the Multiple Unicast Networ Coding Conjecture Michael Langberg Computer Science Division Open University of Israel Raanana 43107, Israel miel@openu.ac.il Muriel Médard Research Laboratory of Electronics

### The Container Selection Problem

The Container Selection Problem Viswanath Nagarajan 1, Kanthi K. Sarpatwar 2, Baruch Schieber 2, Hadas Shachnai 3, and Joel L. Wolf 2 1 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA viswa@umich.edu 2 IBM

### 3. Linear Programming and Polyhedral Combinatorics

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Handout 6 18.433: Combinatorial Optimization February 20th, 2009 Michel X. Goemans 3. Linear Programming and Polyhedral Combinatorics Summary of what was seen in the

### COMBINATORIAL PROPERTIES OF THE HIGMAN-SIMS GRAPH. 1. Introduction

COMBINATORIAL PROPERTIES OF THE HIGMAN-SIMS GRAPH ZACHARY ABEL 1. Introduction In this survey we discuss properties of the Higman-Sims graph, which has 100 vertices, 1100 edges, and is 22 regular. In fact

### A Sublinear Bipartiteness Tester for Bounded Degree Graphs

A Sublinear Bipartiteness Tester for Bounded Degree Graphs Oded Goldreich Dana Ron February 5, 1998 Abstract We present a sublinear-time algorithm for testing whether a bounded degree graph is bipartite

### Online Primal-Dual Algorithms for Maximizing Ad-Auctions Revenue

Online Primal-Dual Algorithms for Maximizing Ad-Auctions Revenue Niv Buchbinder 1, Kamal Jain 2, and Joseph (Seffi) Naor 1 1 Computer Science Department, Technion, Haifa, Israel. 2 Microsoft Research,

Online Adwords Allocation Shoshana Neuburger May 6, 2009 1 Overview Many search engines auction the advertising space alongside search results. When Google interviewed Amin Saberi in 2004, their advertisement

### A Simple Linear Time (1 + ε)-approximation Algorithm for k-means Clustering in Any Dimensions

A Simple Linear Time (1 + ε)-approximation Algorithm for k-means Clustering in Any Dimensions Amit Kumar Dept. of Computer Science & Engg., IIT Delhi New Delhi-110016, India amitk@cse.iitd.ernet.in Yogish

### Chapter 13: Binary and Mixed-Integer Programming

Chapter 3: Binary and Mixed-Integer Programming The general branch and bound approach described in the previous chapter can be customized for special situations. This chapter addresses two special situations:

### A o(n)-competitive Deterministic Algorithm for Online Matching on a Line

A o(n)-competitive Deterministic Algorithm for Online Matching on a Line Antonios Antoniadis 2, Neal Barcelo 1, Michael Nugent 1, Kirk Pruhs 1, and Michele Scquizzato 3 1 Department of Computer Science,

### Lecture 17 : Equivalence and Order Relations DRAFT

CS/Math 240: Introduction to Discrete Mathematics 3/31/2011 Lecture 17 : Equivalence and Order Relations Instructor: Dieter van Melkebeek Scribe: Dalibor Zelený DRAFT Last lecture we introduced the notion

### THE SCHEDULING OF MAINTENANCE SERVICE

THE SCHEDULING OF MAINTENANCE SERVICE Shoshana Anily Celia A. Glass Refael Hassin Abstract We study a discrete problem of scheduling activities of several types under the constraint that at most a single

### 1.1 Related work For non-preemptive scheduling on uniformly related machines the rst algorithm with a constant competitive ratio was given by Aspnes e

A Lower Bound for On-Line Scheduling on Uniformly Related Machines Leah Epstein Jir Sgall September 23, 1999 lea@math.tau.ac.il, Department of Computer Science, Tel-Aviv University, Israel; sgall@math.cas.cz,

### Incremental Network Design with Shortest Paths

Incremental Network Design with Shortest Paths Tarek Elgindy, Andreas T. Ernst, Matthew Baxter CSIRO Mathematics Informatics and Statistics, Australia Martin W.P. Savelsbergh University of Newcastle, Australia

### Definition 11.1. Given a graph G on n vertices, we define the following quantities:

Lecture 11 The Lovász ϑ Function 11.1 Perfect graphs We begin with some background on perfect graphs. graphs. First, we define some quantities on Definition 11.1. Given a graph G on n vertices, we define

### SHARP BOUNDS FOR THE SUM OF THE SQUARES OF THE DEGREES OF A GRAPH

31 Kragujevac J. Math. 25 (2003) 31 49. SHARP BOUNDS FOR THE SUM OF THE SQUARES OF THE DEGREES OF A GRAPH Kinkar Ch. Das Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721302, W.B.,

### Routing Problems. Viswanath Nagarajan R. Ravi. Abstract. We study the distance constrained vehicle routing problem (DVRP) [20, 21]: given a set

Approximation Algorithms for Distance Constrained Vehicle Routing Problems Viswanath Nagarajan R. Ravi Abstract We study the distance constrained vehicle routing problem (DVRP) [20, 21]: given a set of

### Information Theory and Coding Prof. S. N. Merchant Department of Electrical Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay

Information Theory and Coding Prof. S. N. Merchant Department of Electrical Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay Lecture - 17 Shannon-Fano-Elias Coding and Introduction to Arithmetic Coding

### Bicolored Shortest Paths in Graphs with Applications to Network Overlay Design

Bicolored Shortest Paths in Graphs with Applications to Network Overlay Design Hongsik Choi and Hyeong-Ah Choi Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science George Washington University Washington,

### Stationary random graphs on Z with prescribed iid degrees and finite mean connections

Stationary random graphs on Z with prescribed iid degrees and finite mean connections Maria Deijfen Johan Jonasson February 2006 Abstract Let F be a probability distribution with support on the non-negative

### Permutation Betting Markets: Singleton Betting with Extra Information

Permutation Betting Markets: Singleton Betting with Extra Information Mohammad Ghodsi Sharif University of Technology ghodsi@sharif.edu Hamid Mahini Sharif University of Technology mahini@ce.sharif.edu

### A simple criterion on degree sequences of graphs

Discrete Applied Mathematics 156 (2008) 3513 3517 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Discrete Applied Mathematics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/dam Note A simple criterion on degree

### On the k-path cover problem for cacti

On the k-path cover problem for cacti Zemin Jin and Xueliang Li Center for Combinatorics and LPMC Nankai University Tianjin 300071, P.R. China zeminjin@eyou.com, x.li@eyou.com Abstract In this paper we

### CS 598CSC: Combinatorial Optimization Lecture date: 2/4/2010

CS 598CSC: Combinatorial Optimization Lecture date: /4/010 Instructor: Chandra Chekuri Scribe: David Morrison Gomory-Hu Trees (The work in this section closely follows [3]) Let G = (V, E) be an undirected

### Approximation Algorithms. Scheduling. Approximation algorithms. Scheduling jobs on a single machine

Approximation algorithms Approximation Algorithms Fast. Cheap. Reliable. Choose two. NP-hard problems: choose 2 of optimal polynomial time all instances Approximation algorithms. Trade-off between time

### Inverse Optimization by James Orlin

Inverse Optimization by James Orlin based on research that is joint with Ravi Ahuja Jeopardy 000 -- the Math Programming Edition The category is linear objective functions The answer: When you maximize

Mechanisms for Fair Attribution Eric Balkanski Yaron Singer Abstract We propose a new framework for optimization under fairness constraints. The problems we consider model procurement where the goal is

### Mathematics for Economics (Part I) Note 5: Convex Sets and Concave Functions

Natalia Lazzati Mathematics for Economics (Part I) Note 5: Convex Sets and Concave Functions Note 5 is based on Madden (1986, Ch. 1, 2, 4 and 7) and Simon and Blume (1994, Ch. 13 and 21). Concave functions

### Private Approximation of Clustering and Vertex Cover

Private Approximation of Clustering and Vertex Cover Amos Beimel, Renen Hallak, and Kobbi Nissim Department of Computer Science, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Abstract. Private approximation of search

### OPRE 6201 : 2. Simplex Method

OPRE 6201 : 2. Simplex Method 1 The Graphical Method: An Example Consider the following linear program: Max 4x 1 +3x 2 Subject to: 2x 1 +3x 2 6 (1) 3x 1 +2x 2 3 (2) 2x 2 5 (3) 2x 1 +x 2 4 (4) x 1, x 2

### Approximating Minimum Bounded Degree Spanning Trees to within One of Optimal

Approximating Minimum Bounded Degree Spanning Trees to within One of Optimal ABSTACT Mohit Singh Tepper School of Business Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA USA mohits@andrew.cmu.edu In the MINIMUM

### Resource Allocation with Time Intervals

Resource Allocation with Time Intervals Andreas Darmann Ulrich Pferschy Joachim Schauer Abstract We study a resource allocation problem where jobs have the following characteristics: Each job consumes

### 1. R In this and the next section we are going to study the properties of sequences of real numbers.

+a 1. R In this and the next section we are going to study the properties of sequences of real numbers. Definition 1.1. (Sequence) A sequence is a function with domain N. Example 1.2. A sequence of real