Ofer Freedman, Paweł Gawrychowski, Patrick K. Nicholson, O. Weimann
{"title":"树的最优距离标记方案","authors":"Ofer Freedman, Paweł Gawrychowski, Patrick K. Nicholson, O. Weimann","doi":"10.1145/3087801.3087804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Labeling schemes seek to assign a short label to each node in a network, so that a function on two nodes (such as distance or adjacency) can be computed by examining their labels alone. For the particular case of trees, following a long line of research, optimal bounds (up to low order terms) were recently obtained for adjacency labeling [FOCS '15], nearest common ancestor labeling [SODA '14], and ancestry labeling [SICOMP '06]. In this paper we obtain optimal bounds for distance labeling. We present labels of size 1/4\\log^2n+o(\\log^2n), matching (up to low order terms) the recent 1/4\\log^2n-\\Oh(\\log n) lower bound [ICALP '16]. Prior to our work, all distance labeling schemes for trees could be reinterpreted as universal trees. A tree T is said to be universal if any tree on $n$ nodes can be found as a subtree of T. A universal tree with |T| nodes implies a distance labeling scheme with label size \\log |T|. In 1981, Chung et al. proved that any distance labeling scheme based on universal trees requires labels of size 1/2\\log^2 n -\\log n \\cdot \\log\\log n+\\Oh(\\log n). Our scheme is the first to break this lower bound, showing a separation between distance labeling and universal trees. The θ (log2 n) barrier for distance labeling in trees has led researchers to consider distances bounded by k. The size of such labels was shown to be \\log n+\\Oh(k\\sqrt{\\log n}) in [WADS '01], and then improved to \\log n+\\Oh(k^2(\\log(k\\log n)) in [SODA '03] and finally to \\log n+\\Oh(k\\log(k\\log(n/k))) in [PODC '07]. We show how to construct labels whose size is the minimum between \\log n+\\Oh(k\\log((\\log n)/k)) and \\Oh(\\log n \\cdot \\log(k/\\log n)). We complement this with almost tight lower bounds of \\log n+\\Omega(k\\log(\\log n / (k\\log k))) and \\Omega(\\log n \\cdot \\log(k/\\log n)). Finally, we consider (1+\\eps)-approximate distances. We show that the recent labeling scheme of [ICALP '16] can be easily modified to obtain an \\Oh(\\log(1/\\eps)\\cdot \\log n) upper bound and we prove a matching \\Omega(\\log(1/\\eps)\\cdot \\log n) lower bound.","PeriodicalId":324970,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimal Distance Labeling Schemes for Trees\",\"authors\":\"Ofer Freedman, Paweł Gawrychowski, Patrick K. Nicholson, O. Weimann\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3087801.3087804\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Labeling schemes seek to assign a short label to each node in a network, so that a function on two nodes (such as distance or adjacency) can be computed by examining their labels alone. For the particular case of trees, following a long line of research, optimal bounds (up to low order terms) were recently obtained for adjacency labeling [FOCS '15], nearest common ancestor labeling [SODA '14], and ancestry labeling [SICOMP '06]. In this paper we obtain optimal bounds for distance labeling. We present labels of size 1/4\\\\log^2n+o(\\\\log^2n), matching (up to low order terms) the recent 1/4\\\\log^2n-\\\\Oh(\\\\log n) lower bound [ICALP '16]. Prior to our work, all distance labeling schemes for trees could be reinterpreted as universal trees. A tree T is said to be universal if any tree on $n$ nodes can be found as a subtree of T. A universal tree with |T| nodes implies a distance labeling scheme with label size \\\\log |T|. In 1981, Chung et al. proved that any distance labeling scheme based on universal trees requires labels of size 1/2\\\\log^2 n -\\\\log n \\\\cdot \\\\log\\\\log n+\\\\Oh(\\\\log n). Our scheme is the first to break this lower bound, showing a separation between distance labeling and universal trees. The θ (log2 n) barrier for distance labeling in trees has led researchers to consider distances bounded by k. The size of such labels was shown to be \\\\log n+\\\\Oh(k\\\\sqrt{\\\\log n}) in [WADS '01], and then improved to \\\\log n+\\\\Oh(k^2(\\\\log(k\\\\log n)) in [SODA '03] and finally to \\\\log n+\\\\Oh(k\\\\log(k\\\\log(n/k))) in [PODC '07]. We show how to construct labels whose size is the minimum between \\\\log n+\\\\Oh(k\\\\log((\\\\log n)/k)) and \\\\Oh(\\\\log n \\\\cdot \\\\log(k/\\\\log n)). We complement this with almost tight lower bounds of \\\\log n+\\\\Omega(k\\\\log(\\\\log n / (k\\\\log k))) and \\\\Omega(\\\\log n \\\\cdot \\\\log(k/\\\\log n)). Finally, we consider (1+\\\\eps)-approximate distances. We show that the recent labeling scheme of [ICALP '16] can be easily modified to obtain an \\\\Oh(\\\\log(1/\\\\eps)\\\\cdot \\\\log n) upper bound and we prove a matching \\\\Omega(\\\\log(1/\\\\eps)\\\\cdot \\\\log n) lower bound.\",\"PeriodicalId\":324970,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3087801.3087804\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3087801.3087804","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Labeling schemes seek to assign a short label to each node in a network, so that a function on two nodes (such as distance or adjacency) can be computed by examining their labels alone. For the particular case of trees, following a long line of research, optimal bounds (up to low order terms) were recently obtained for adjacency labeling [FOCS '15], nearest common ancestor labeling [SODA '14], and ancestry labeling [SICOMP '06]. In this paper we obtain optimal bounds for distance labeling. We present labels of size 1/4\log^2n+o(\log^2n), matching (up to low order terms) the recent 1/4\log^2n-\Oh(\log n) lower bound [ICALP '16]. Prior to our work, all distance labeling schemes for trees could be reinterpreted as universal trees. A tree T is said to be universal if any tree on $n$ nodes can be found as a subtree of T. A universal tree with |T| nodes implies a distance labeling scheme with label size \log |T|. In 1981, Chung et al. proved that any distance labeling scheme based on universal trees requires labels of size 1/2\log^2 n -\log n \cdot \log\log n+\Oh(\log n). Our scheme is the first to break this lower bound, showing a separation between distance labeling and universal trees. The θ (log2 n) barrier for distance labeling in trees has led researchers to consider distances bounded by k. The size of such labels was shown to be \log n+\Oh(k\sqrt{\log n}) in [WADS '01], and then improved to \log n+\Oh(k^2(\log(k\log n)) in [SODA '03] and finally to \log n+\Oh(k\log(k\log(n/k))) in [PODC '07]. We show how to construct labels whose size is the minimum between \log n+\Oh(k\log((\log n)/k)) and \Oh(\log n \cdot \log(k/\log n)). We complement this with almost tight lower bounds of \log n+\Omega(k\log(\log n / (k\log k))) and \Omega(\log n \cdot \log(k/\log n)). Finally, we consider (1+\eps)-approximate distances. We show that the recent labeling scheme of [ICALP '16] can be easily modified to obtain an \Oh(\log(1/\eps)\cdot \log n) upper bound and we prove a matching \Omega(\log(1/\eps)\cdot \log n) lower bound.