{"title":"SIGACT新闻在线算法专栏","authors":"R. V. Stee","doi":"10.1145/3197406.3197417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For this issue, Matthias Englert has contributed an alternative and simpler proof of a result by Gamzu and Segev, which was in ACM Transactions on Algorithms in 2009. The problem considered in this paper was the reordering bu↵er problem on the line. Gamzu and Segev were the first to give an O(log n)-competitive algorithm for this problem, and there has been no improvement on this since then, leaving a gap with the best known lower bound of 2.154 by the same authors. Matthias’ proof shows that this result can be slightly improved (a smaller hidden constant) and simplified. Who is going to be the first to give a constant competitive algorithm, or show that this cannot be done?","PeriodicalId":22106,"journal":{"name":"SIGACT News","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"SIGACT News Online Algorithms Column 33\",\"authors\":\"R. V. Stee\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3197406.3197417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For this issue, Matthias Englert has contributed an alternative and simpler proof of a result by Gamzu and Segev, which was in ACM Transactions on Algorithms in 2009. The problem considered in this paper was the reordering bu↵er problem on the line. Gamzu and Segev were the first to give an O(log n)-competitive algorithm for this problem, and there has been no improvement on this since then, leaving a gap with the best known lower bound of 2.154 by the same authors. Matthias’ proof shows that this result can be slightly improved (a smaller hidden constant) and simplified. Who is going to be the first to give a constant competitive algorithm, or show that this cannot be done?\",\"PeriodicalId\":22106,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SIGACT News\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SIGACT News\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3197406.3197417\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SIGACT News","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3197406.3197417","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
为此，Matthias Englert在2009年的ACM Transactions on Algorithms上为Gamzu和Segev的结果提供了另一种更简单的证明。本文考虑的问题是在线上的重排序问题。Gamzu和Segev是第一个为这个问题给出O(log n)竞争算法的人，从那时起，这个算法就没有任何改进，与同一作者最著名的下界2.154有差距。Matthias的证明表明，这个结果可以稍微改进(一个更小的隐藏常数)并简化。谁会第一个给出一个恒定竞争算法，或者证明这是不可能做到的?
For this issue, Matthias Englert has contributed an alternative and simpler proof of a result by Gamzu and Segev, which was in ACM Transactions on Algorithms in 2009. The problem considered in this paper was the reordering bu↵er problem on the line. Gamzu and Segev were the first to give an O(log n)-competitive algorithm for this problem, and there has been no improvement on this since then, leaving a gap with the best known lower bound of 2.154 by the same authors. Matthias’ proof shows that this result can be slightly improved (a smaller hidden constant) and simplified. Who is going to be the first to give a constant competitive algorithm, or show that this cannot be done?
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
