Skip to main content
Log in

Few Cuts Meet Many Point Sets

  • Published:
Algorithmica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study the problem of how to split many point sets in \(\mathbb {R}^d\) into smaller parts using a few (shared) splitting hyperplanes. This problem is related to the classical Ham-Sandwich Theorem. We provide a logarithmic approximation to the optimal solution using the greedy algorithm for submodular optimization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For the sake simplicity of exposition, we ignore here the case that the sign is zero.

References

  1. Matousek, J., Patáková, Z.: Multilevel polynomial partitions and simplified range searching. Disc. Comput. Geom. 54(1), 22–41 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00454-015-9701-2

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Agarwal, P.K., Aronov, B., Ezra, E., Zahl, J.: Efficient algorithm for generalized polynomial partitioning and its applications. SIAM J. Comput. 50(2), 760–787 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1137/19M1268550

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Sheffer, A.: Polynomial Methods and Incidence Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2022). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108959988

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Stone, A.H., Tukey, J.W.: Generalized “sandwich’’ theorems. Duke Math. J. 9(2), 356–359 (1942). https://doi.org/10.1215/S0012-7094-42-00925-6

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Har-Peled, S., Jones, M.: On separating points by lines. Disc. Comput. Geom. 63(3), 705–730 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00454-019-00103-z

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Lo, C.-Y., Matoušek, J., Steiger, W.: Algorithms for ham-sandwich cuts. Disc. Comput. Geom. 11, 433–452 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02574017

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Bárány, I., Hubard, A., Jerónimo, J.: Slicing convex sets and measures by a hyperplane. Disc. Comput. Geom. 39(1–3), 67–75 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00454-007-9021-2

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Blagojević, P.V., Soberón, P.: Thieves can make sandwiches. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 50(1), 108–123 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1112/blms.12109

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Ramos, E.A.: Equipartition of mass distributions by hyperplanes. Disc. Comput. Geom. 15(2), 147–167 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02717729

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Schnider, P.: Ham-sandwich cuts and center transversals in subspaces. In: Proc. 35th Int. Annu. Sympos. Comput. Geom. (SoCG). LIPIcs, vol. 129, pp. 56– 15615 ( 2019). https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.SoCG.2019.56

  11. Steiger, W., Zhao, J.: Generalized ham-sandwich cuts. Disc. Comput. Geom. 44(3), 535–545 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00454-009-9225-8

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaplan, H., Matoušek, J., Sharir, M.: Simple proofs of classical theorems in discrete geometry via the Guth-Katz polynomial partitioning technique. Disc. Comput. Geom. 48(3), 499–517 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00454-012-9443-3

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Agarwal, P.K., Matoušek, J., Sharir, M.: On range searching with semialgebraic sets. II. SIAM J. Comput. 42(6), 2039–2062 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1137/120890855

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Matoušek, J.: Geometric range searching. ACM Comput. Surv. 26(4), 421–461 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1145/197405.197408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Inamdar, T., Varadarajan, K.R.: On partial covering for geometric set systems. In: Speckmann, B., Tóth, C.D. (eds.) Proc. 34th Int. Annu. Sympos. Comput. Geom. (SoCG). LIPIcs, vol. 99, pp. 47– 14714. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Wadern, Germany ( 2018). https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.SoCG.2018.47

  16. Wolsey, L.A.: An analysis of the greedy algorithm for the submodular set covering problem. Combinatorica 2(4), 385–393 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02579435

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Kolliopoulos, S.G., Young, N.E.: Approximation algorithms for covering/packing integer programs. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 71(4), 495–505 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2005.05.002

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Sariel Har-Peled was partially supported by NSF AF awards CCF-1421231, CCF-1217462, and CCF-1907400. Mitchell Jones was partially supported by NSF AF awards CCF-1421231 and CCF-1907400. The authors also thank the anonymous referees for their detailed and useful feedback.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sariel Har-Peled.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A Proof of Theorem 4

Appendix A Proof of Theorem 4

Proof

This result is by now classical, and we include the proof only for the sake of completeness. Let be the optimal solution. Consider a current solution \(\mathcal {C}_i \subseteq \Pi \) at iteration i, and observe that by monotonicity, we have

$$\begin{aligned} f_{\max }= f(\mathcal {O}) \le f(\mathcal {C}_i \cup \mathcal {O}) \le f_{\max }. \end{aligned}$$

As such, we have \( f(\mathcal {C}_i \cup \mathcal {O}) = f_{\max }\). Let \(\Delta _i = f(\mathcal {O}) - f(\mathcal {C}_i)\) be the of \(\mathcal {C}_i\). For \(j=0, \ldots , k\), let Set . We have that

Hence, there is an index j, such that \(\delta _j \ge \Delta _i/k\). Now, by submodularity, we have that

However, the greedy algorithm adds an element that maximizes the value of , which is at least \(\Delta _i/k\). Put differently, the added element decreases the deficiency of the current solution by a factor \(\le 1-1/k\). Therefore the deficiency in the end of the ith iteration is at most \(\Delta _i \le (1-1/k)^i \Delta _0 = (1-1/k)^if(\mathcal {O}).\) This quantity is less than one for \(i = O( k\log f_{\max })\). \(\square \)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Har-Peled, S., Jones, M. Few Cuts Meet Many Point Sets. Algorithmica 85, 965–975 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-022-01059-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-022-01059-y

Keywords

Navigation