Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1007.3611

LP-rounding algorithms for facility-location problems

Abstract

We study LP-rounding approximation algorithms for metric uncapacitated facility-location problems. We first give a new analysis for the algorithm of Chudak and Shmoys, which differs from the analysis of Byrka and Aardal in that now we do not need any bound based on the solution to the dual LP program. Besides obtaining the optimal bifactor approximation as do Byrka and Aardal, we can now also show that the algorithm with scaling parameter equaling 1.58 is, in fact, an 1.58-approximation algorithm. More importantly, we suggest an approach based on additional randomization and analyses such as ours, which could achieve or approach the conjectured optimal 1.46...--approximation for this basic problem. Next, using essentially the same techniques, we obtain improved approximation algorithms in the 2-stage stochastic variant of the problem, where we must open a subset of facilities having only stochastic information about the future demand from the clients. For this problem we obtain a 2.2975-approximation algorithm in the standard setting, and a 2.4957-approximation in the more restricted, per-scenario setting. We then study robust fault-tolerant facility location, introduced by Chechik and Peleg: solutions here are designed to provide low connection cost in case of failure of up to $k$ facilities. Chechik and Peleg gave a 6.5-approximation algorithm for $k=1$ and a ($7.5k + 1.5$)-approximation algorithm for general $k$. We improve this to an LP-rounding $(k+5+4/k)$-approximation algorithm. We also observe that in case of oblivious failures the expected approximation ratio can be reduced to $k + 1.5$, and that the integrality gap of the natural LP-relaxation of the problem is at least $k + 1$.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jaroslaw Byrka, MohammadReza Ghodsi, Aravind Srinivasan. 2012-03-08. LP-rounding algorithms for facility-location problems. https://arxiv.org/abs/1007.3611

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Online Flexible Busy Time Scheduling on Heterogeneous Machines

We study the online busy time scheduling model on heterogeneous machines. In our setting, jobs with uniform processing time arrive online with a deadline that becomes known to the algorithm at the job's arrival time. An algorithm has access to machines, each with different associated capacities and costs. The goal is to schedule jobs on machines by their deadline, so that the total cost incurred by the scheduling algorithm is minimized. While busy time scheduling has been well-studied, relatively little is known when machines are heterogeneous (i.e., have different costs and capacities), despite this natural theoretical generalization being the most practical model for clients using cloud computing services. We make significant progress in understanding this model by designing a deterministic online algorithm with competitive ratio 8(2p-1)/p < 16 when all jobs have uniform processing time p. A randomized version of this algorithm is 4(2p-1)/(p \ln 2)-competitive against an oblivious adversary. For unit-processing-time jobs, we give lower bounds of 4 and e (where e is Euler's number) on the competitive ratio of deterministic and randomized online algorithms, respectively. For unit-processing-time jobs with agreeable deadlines, we provide a deterministic 2-competitive online algorithm and a matching lower bound.

cs.DS

The Binary Tree Mechanism is Optimal for Differentially Private Continual Counting

Private continual counting is a fundamental problem in differential privacy: given a binary stream of length $n$, where each $1$ corresponds to the contribution of one individual, the goal is to release all running counts while protecting the privacy of each individual. For fixed privacy parameters, the standard binary tree mechanism achieves expected $\ell_\infty$ error $O(\log^{3/2} n)$ under approximate differential privacy and $O(\log^2 n)$ under pure differential privacy. Whether these dependences on the stream length are necessary has remained a central open problem. For fixed $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$, we prove a lower bound of $Ω(\log^{3/2} n)$ under approximate DP with sufficiently small fixed $δ>0$, and a lower bound of $Ω(\log^2 n)$ under pure DP. These bounds establish the optimality of the binary tree mechanism in both settings. The bounds hold for arbitrary mechanisms, even when the entire stream is available in advance. Both proofs use the same decomposition and accumulation of residual noise along a tree. As a consequence of the approximate-DP bound, we also obtain a largest-possible separation between hereditary discrepancy and private $\ell_\infty$ error for linear queries, showing that the known general upper bound in terms of hereditary discrepancy has the optimal dependence on the number of queries.

cs.DS

Directed Hamiltonian-Cycle Parity in $O^*((3/2)^n)$ Deterministic Time and Polynomial Space

We give a deterministic algorithm that computes the parity of the number of Hamiltonian cycles in an $n$-vertex directed graph in $O(n^4(3/2)^n)$ time and $O(n^2)$ bits of working space, improving the $O^*(φ^n)$ bound of Björklund and Husfeldt. Their local-degree formula reduces the problem to a weighted sum over solutions of structured quadratic equations. We cover the corresponding ternary state space by binary subcubes, each inducing an affine system. The Kuang--Wang cover can be regenerated within the target bound; canonical ownership resolves its overlaps, while self-loop conditional expectations bound every affine solution visit. Rollback elimination shares the work across cover prefixes. The same cover gives a Las Vegas algorithm listing all $L$ solutions of $m$ affine product constraints in $N$ Boolean variables in expected time $\operatorname{poly}(N,m)((3/2)^m+L)$ and polynomial space. Finally, we show that complete enumeration can require $Ω((3/2)^n)$ visits even on strongly connected digraphs after an optimal self-loop choice. This is a limitation of the enumeration method, not a general lower bound for Hamiltonian-cycle parity.

cs.DS