Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Dynamic $((1+ε)\ln n)$-Approximation Algorithms for Minimum Set Cover and Dominating Set (2312.17625v1)

Published 29 Dec 2023 in cs.DS

Abstract: The minimum set cover (MSC) problem admits two classic algorithms: a greedy $\ln n$-approximation and a primal-dual $f$-approximation, where $n$ is the universe size and $f$ is the maximum frequency of an element. Both algorithms are simple and efficient, and remarkably -- one cannot improve these approximations under hardness results by more than a factor of $(1+\epsilon)$, for any constant $\epsilon > 0$. In their pioneering work, Gupta et al. [STOC'17] showed that the greedy algorithm can be dynamized to achieve $O(\log n)$-approximation with update time $O(f \log n)$. Building on this result, Hjuler et al. [STACS'18] dynamized the greedy minimum dominating set (MDS) algorithm, achieving a similar approximation with update time $O(\Delta \log n)$ (the analog of $O(f \log n)$), albeit for unweighted instances. The approximations of both algorithms, which are the state-of-the-art, exceed the static $\ln n$-approximation by a rather large constant factor. In sharp contrast, the current best dynamic primal-dual MSC algorithms achieve fast update times together with an approximation that exceeds the static $f$-approximation by a factor of (at most) $1+\epsilon$, for any $\epsilon > 0$. This paper aims to bridge the gap between the best approximation factor of the dynamic greedy MSC and MDS algorithms and the static $\ln n$ bound. We present dynamic algorithms for weighted greedy MSC and MDS with approximation $(1+\epsilon)\ln n$ for any $\epsilon > 0$, while achieving the same update time (ignoring dependencies on $\epsilon$) of the best previous algorithms (with approximation significantly larger than $\ln n$). Moreover, [...]

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (23)
  1. Dynamic set cover: improved algorithms and lower bounds. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 114–125, 2019.
  2. S. Assadi and S. Solomon. Fully dynamic set cover via hypergraph maximal matching: An optimal approximation through a local approach. In Proc. 29th ESA, volume 204, pages 8:1–8:18, 2021.
  3. Fully dynamic maximal matching in O⁢(log⁡n)𝑂𝑛{O}(\log n)italic_O ( roman_log italic_n ) update time. In Proceedings of the 52nd IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2011, Palm Springs, CA, October 23-25, 2011 (see also SICOMP’15 version, and subsequent erratum), pages 383–392, 2011.
  4. Online bipartite matching with amortized replacements. In Proc. SODA, pages 947–959, 2018.
  5. Deterministic fully dynamic approximate vertex cover and fractional matching in O(1) amortized update time. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization, IPCO 2017, Waterloo, ON, Canada, June 26-28, 2017, pages 86–98, 2017.
  6. A new deterministic algorithm for dynamic set cover. In 2019 IEEE 60th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 406–423. IEEE, 2019.
  7. Dynamic set cover: Improved amortized and worst-case update time. In Proc. SODA, pages 2537–2549, 2021.
  8. Nearly optimal dynamic set cover: Breaking the quadratic-in-f𝑓fitalic_f time barrier. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.00793, 2023.
  9. V. Chvatal. A greedy heuristic for the set-covering problem. Mathematics of Operations Research, 4(3):233–235, 1979.
  10. I. Dinur and D. Steurer. Analytical approach to parallel repetition. In Proceedings of the forty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 624–633, 2014.
  11. U. Feige. A threshold of ln n for approximating set cover. J. ACM, 45(4):634–652, jul 1998.
  12. Online and dynamic algorithms for set cover. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2017, Montreal, QC, Canada, June 19-23, 2017, pages 537–550, 2017.
  13. A local search-based approach for set covering, 2022.
  14. A. Gupta and R. Levin. Fully-dynamic submodular cover with bounded recourse. In Proc. 61st FOCS, pages 1147–1157, 2020.
  15. Dominating sets and connected dominating sets in dynamic graphs. In Proc. 36th STACS, volume 126, pages 35:1–35:17, 2019.
  16. D. S. Johnson. Approximation algorithms for combinatorial problems. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 9(3):256–278, 1974.
  17. S. Khot and O. Regev. Vertex cover might be hard to approximate to within 2-epsilon. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 74(3):335–349, 2008.
  18. L. Lovász. On the ratio of optimal integral and fractional covers. Discrete Mathematics, 13(4):383–390, 1975.
  19. C. Lund and M. Yannakakis. On the hardness of approximating minimization problems. J. ACM, 41(5):960–981, sep 1994.
  20. P. Slavík. A tight analysis of the greedy algorithm for set cover. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’96, page 435–441, New York, NY, USA, 1996. Association for Computing Machinery.
  21. N. Solomon and S. Solomon. A generalized matching reconfiguration problem. In Proc. 12th ITCS, volume 185, pages 57:1–57:20, 2021.
  22. S. Solomon. Fully dynamic maximal matching in constant update time. In Proceedings of the 57th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2016, New Brunswick, NJ, USA, October 9-11, 2016, pages 325–334, 2016.
  23. The design of approximation algorithms. Cambridge university press, 2011.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (2)
  1. Shay Solomon (55 papers)
  2. Amitai Uzrad (3 papers)

Summary

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