{"title":"随机顺序区间选择","authors":"Allan Borodin, Christodoulos Karavasilis","doi":"arxiv-2407.20941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the problem of online unweighted interval selection, the objective is to\nmaximize the number of non-conflicting intervals accepted by the algorithm. In\nthe conventional online model of irrevocable decisions, there is an Omega(n)\nlower bound on the competitive ratio, even for randomized algorithms [Bachmann\net al. 2013]. In a line of work that allows for revocable acceptances, [Faigle\nand Nawijn 1995] gave a greedy 1-competitive (i.e. optimal) algorithm in the\nreal-time model, where intervals arrive in order of non-decreasing starting\ntimes. The natural extension of their algorithm in the adversarial (any-order)\nmodel is 2k-competitive [Borodin and Karavasilis 2023], when there are at most\nk different interval lengths, and that is optimal for all deterministic, and\nmemoryless randomized algorithms. We study this problem in the random-order\nmodel, where the adversary chooses the instance, but the online sequence is a\nuniformly random permutation of the items. We consider the same algorithm that\nis optimal in the cases of the real-time and any-order models, and give an\nupper bound of 2.5 on the competitive ratio under random-order arrivals. We also show how to utilize random-order arrivals to extract a random bit\nwith a worst case bias of 2/3, when there are at least two distinct item types.\nWe use this bit to derandomize the barely random algorithm of [Fung et al.\n2014] and get a deterministic 3-competitive algorithm for single-length\ninterval selection with arbitrary weights.","PeriodicalId":501525,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Data Structures and Algorithms","volume":"56 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Random-Order Interval Selection\",\"authors\":\"Allan Borodin, Christodoulos Karavasilis\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2407.20941\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the problem of online unweighted interval selection, the objective is to\\nmaximize the number of non-conflicting intervals accepted by the algorithm. In\\nthe conventional online model of irrevocable decisions, there is an Omega(n)\\nlower bound on the competitive ratio, even for randomized algorithms [Bachmann\\net al. 2013]. In a line of work that allows for revocable acceptances, [Faigle\\nand Nawijn 1995] gave a greedy 1-competitive (i.e. optimal) algorithm in the\\nreal-time model, where intervals arrive in order of non-decreasing starting\\ntimes. The natural extension of their algorithm in the adversarial (any-order)\\nmodel is 2k-competitive [Borodin and Karavasilis 2023], when there are at most\\nk different interval lengths, and that is optimal for all deterministic, and\\nmemoryless randomized algorithms. We study this problem in the random-order\\nmodel, where the adversary chooses the instance, but the online sequence is a\\nuniformly random permutation of the items. We consider the same algorithm that\\nis optimal in the cases of the real-time and any-order models, and give an\\nupper bound of 2.5 on the competitive ratio under random-order arrivals. We also show how to utilize random-order arrivals to extract a random bit\\nwith a worst case bias of 2/3, when there are at least two distinct item types.\\nWe use this bit to derandomize the barely random algorithm of [Fung et al.\\n2014] and get a deterministic 3-competitive algorithm for single-length\\ninterval selection with arbitrary weights.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501525,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - CS - Data Structures and Algorithms\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"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-2407.20941\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Data Structures and Algorithms","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2407.20941","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
In the problem of online unweighted interval selection, the objective is to
maximize the number of non-conflicting intervals accepted by the algorithm. In
the conventional online model of irrevocable decisions, there is an Omega(n)
lower bound on the competitive ratio, even for randomized algorithms [Bachmann
et al. 2013]. In a line of work that allows for revocable acceptances, [Faigle
and Nawijn 1995] gave a greedy 1-competitive (i.e. optimal) algorithm in the
real-time model, where intervals arrive in order of non-decreasing starting
times. The natural extension of their algorithm in the adversarial (any-order)
model is 2k-competitive [Borodin and Karavasilis 2023], when there are at most
k different interval lengths, and that is optimal for all deterministic, and
memoryless randomized algorithms. We study this problem in the random-order
model, where the adversary chooses the instance, but the online sequence is a
uniformly random permutation of the items. We consider the same algorithm that
is optimal in the cases of the real-time and any-order models, and give an
upper bound of 2.5 on the competitive ratio under random-order arrivals. We also show how to utilize random-order arrivals to extract a random bit
with a worst case bias of 2/3, when there are at least two distinct item types.
We use this bit to derandomize the barely random algorithm of [Fung et al.
2014] and get a deterministic 3-competitive algorithm for single-length
interval selection with arbitrary weights.