Hung Le, Shay Solomon, Cuong Than, Csaba D. Tóth, Tianyi Zhang
{"title":"Towards Instance-Optimal Euclidean Spanners","authors":"Hung Le, Shay Solomon, Cuong Than, Csaba D. Tóth, Tianyi Zhang","doi":"arxiv-2409.08227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Euclidean spanners are important geometric objects that have been extensively\nstudied since the 1980s. The two most basic \"compactness'' measures of a\nEuclidean spanner $E$ are the size (number of edges) $|E|$ and the weight (sum\nof edge weights) $\\|E\\|$. In this paper, we initiate the study of instance\noptimal Euclidean spanners. Our results are two-fold. We demonstrate that the greedy spanner is far from being instance optimal,\neven when allowing its stretch to grow. More concretely, we design two hard\ninstances of point sets in the plane, where the greedy $(1+x \\epsilon)$-spanner\n(for basically any parameter $x \\geq 1$) has $\\Omega_x(\\epsilon^{-1/2}) \\cdot\n|E_\\mathrm{spa}|$ edges and weight $\\Omega_x(\\epsilon^{-1}) \\cdot\n\\|E_\\mathrm{light}\\|$, where $E_\\mathrm{spa}$ and $E_\\mathrm{light}$ denote the\nper-instance sparsest and lightest $(1+\\epsilon)$-spanners, respectively, and\nthe $\\Omega_x$ notation suppresses a polynomial dependence on $1/x$. As our main contribution, we design a new construction of Euclidean spanners,\nwhich is inherently different from known constructions, achieving the following\nbounds: a stretch of $1+\\epsilon\\cdot 2^{O(\\log^*(d/\\epsilon))}$ with $O(1)\n\\cdot |E_\\mathrm{spa}|$ edges and weight $O(1) \\cdot \\|E_\\mathrm{light}\\|$. In\nother words, we show that a slight increase to the stretch suffices for\nobtaining instance optimality up to an absolute constant for both sparsity and\nlightness. Remarkably, there is only a log-star dependence on the dimension in\nthe stretch, and there is no dependence on it whatsoever in the number of edges\nand weight.","PeriodicalId":501525,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Data Structures and Algorithms","volume":"106 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Data Structures and Algorithms","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.08227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Euclidean spanners are important geometric objects that have been extensively
studied since the 1980s. The two most basic "compactness'' measures of a
Euclidean spanner $E$ are the size (number of edges) $|E|$ and the weight (sum
of edge weights) $\|E\|$. In this paper, we initiate the study of instance
optimal Euclidean spanners. Our results are two-fold. We demonstrate that the greedy spanner is far from being instance optimal,
even when allowing its stretch to grow. More concretely, we design two hard
instances of point sets in the plane, where the greedy $(1+x \epsilon)$-spanner
(for basically any parameter $x \geq 1$) has $\Omega_x(\epsilon^{-1/2}) \cdot
|E_\mathrm{spa}|$ edges and weight $\Omega_x(\epsilon^{-1}) \cdot
\|E_\mathrm{light}\|$, where $E_\mathrm{spa}$ and $E_\mathrm{light}$ denote the
per-instance sparsest and lightest $(1+\epsilon)$-spanners, respectively, and
the $\Omega_x$ notation suppresses a polynomial dependence on $1/x$. As our main contribution, we design a new construction of Euclidean spanners,
which is inherently different from known constructions, achieving the following
bounds: a stretch of $1+\epsilon\cdot 2^{O(\log^*(d/\epsilon))}$ with $O(1)
\cdot |E_\mathrm{spa}|$ edges and weight $O(1) \cdot \|E_\mathrm{light}\|$. In
other words, we show that a slight increase to the stretch suffices for
obtaining instance optimality up to an absolute constant for both sparsity and
lightness. Remarkably, there is only a log-star dependence on the dimension in
the stretch, and there is no dependence on it whatsoever in the number of edges
and weight.