Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
126 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
28 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Prioritized Metric Structures and Embedding (1502.05543v2)

Published 19 Feb 2015 in cs.DS

Abstract: Metric data structures (distance oracles, distance labeling schemes, routing schemes) and low-distortion embeddings provide a powerful algorithmic methodology, which has been successfully applied for approximation algorithms \cite{llr}, online algorithms \cite{BBMN11}, distributed algorithms \cite{KKMPT12} and for computing sparsifiers \cite{ST04}. However, this methodology appears to have a limitation: the worst-case performance inherently depends on the cardinality of the metric, and one could not specify in advance which vertices/points should enjoy a better service (i.e., stretch/distortion, label size/dimension) than that given by the worst-case guarantee. In this paper we alleviate this limitation by devising a suit of {\em prioritized} metric data structures and embeddings. We show that given a priority ranking $(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)$ of the graph vertices (respectively, metric points) one can devise a metric data structure (respectively, embedding) in which the stretch (resp., distortion) incurred by any pair containing a vertex $x_j$ will depend on the rank $j$ of the vertex. We also show that other important parameters, such as the label size and (in some sense) the dimension, may depend only on $j$. In some of our metric data structures (resp., embeddings) we achieve both prioritized stretch (resp., distortion) and label size (resp., dimension) {\em simultaneously}. The worst-case performance of our metric data structures and embeddings is typically asymptotically no worse than of their non-prioritized counterparts.

Citations (25)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.