Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1011.4401

Combinatorial Geometry of Graph Partitioning - I

Abstract

The {\sc $c$-Balanced Separator} problem is a graph-partitioning problem in which given a graph $G$, one aims to find a cut of minimum size such that both the sides of the cut have at least $cn$ vertices. In this paper, we present new directions of progress in the {\sc $c$-Balanced Separator} problem. More specifically, we propose a family of mathematical programs, that depend upon a parameter $p > 0$, and is an extension of the uniform version of the SDPs proposed by Goemans and Linial for this problem. In fact for the case, when $p=1$, if one can solve this program in polynomial time then simply using the Goemans-Williamson's randomized rounding algorithm for {\sc Max Cut} \cite{WG95} will give an $O(1)$-factor approximation algorithm for {\sc $c$-Balanced Separator} improving the best known approximation factor of $O(\sqrt{\log n})$ due to Arora, Rao and Vazirani \cite{ARV}. This family of programs is not convex but one can transform them into so called \emph{\textbf{concave programs}} in which one optimizes a concave function over a convex feasible set. It is well known that the optima of such programs lie at one of the extreme points of the feasible set \cite{TTT85}. Our main contribution is a combinatorial characterization of some extreme points of the feasible set of the mathematical program, for $p=1$ case, which to the best of our knowledge is the first of its kind. We further demonstrate how this characterization can be used to solve the program in a restricted setting. Non-convex programs have recently been investigated by Bhaskara and Vijayaraghvan \cite{BV11} in which they design algorithms for approximating Matrix $p$-norms although their algorithmic techniques are analytical in nature.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Manjish Pal. 2010-11-19. Combinatorial Geometry of Graph Partitioning - I. https://arxiv.org/abs/1011.4401

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