Advertisement

A Comparison of Performance Measures for Online Algorithms

  • Joan Boyar
  • Sandy Irani
  • Kim S. Larsen
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5664)

Abstract

This paper provides a systematic study of several proposed measures for online algorithms in the context of a specific problem, namely, the two server problem on three colinear points. Even though the problem is simple, it encapsulates a core challenge in online algorithms which is to balance greediness and adaptability. We examine Competitive Analysis, the Max/Max Ratio, the Random Order Ratio, Bijective Analysis and Relative Worst Order Analysis, and determine how these measures compare the Greedy Algorithm and Lazy Double Coverage, commonly studied algorithms in the context of server problems. We find that by the Max/Max Ratio and Bijective Analysis, Greedy is the better algorithm. Under the other measures, Lazy Double Coverage is better, though Relative Worst Order Analysis indicates that Greedy is sometimes better. Our results also provide the first proof of optimality of an algorithm under Relative Worst Order Analysis.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Angelopoulos, S., Dorrigiv, R., López-Ortiz, A.: On the separation and equivalence of paging strategies. In: 18th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pp. 229–237 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bein, W.W., Iwama, K., Kawahara, J.: Randomized competitive analysis for two-server problems. In: Halperin, D., Mehlhorn, K. (eds.) ESA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5193, pp. 161–172. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ben-David, S., Borodin, A.: A new measure for the study of on-line algorithms. Algorithmica 11(1), 73–91 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Borodin, A., El-Yaniv, R.: Online Computation and Competitive Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boyar, J., Favrholdt, L.M.: The relative worst order ratio for on-line algorithms. ACM Transactions on Algorithms 3(2), Article No. 22 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boyar, J., Favrholdt, L.M., Larsen, K.S.: The relative worst order ratio applied to paging. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 73(5), 818–843 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boyar, J., Irani, S., Larsen, K.S.: A comparison of performance measures for online algorithms. Technical report, arXiv:0806.0983v1 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chrobak, M., Karloff, H.J., Payne, T.H., Vishwanathan, S.: New results on server problems. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 4(2), 172–181 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dorrigiv, R., López-Ortiz, A.: A survey of performance measures for on-line algorithms. SIGACT News 36(3), 67–81 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feller, W.: An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, 3rd edn., vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (1968); Problem 28, ch. 9, p. 240zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Graham, R.L.: Bounds for certain multiprocessing anomalies. Bell Systems Technical Journal 45, 1563–1581 (1966)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Karlin, A.R., Manasse, M.S., Rudolph, L., Sleator, D.D.: Competitive snoopy caching. Algorithmica 3, 79–119 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kenyon, C.: Best-fit bin-packing with random order. In: 7th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pp. 359–364 (1996)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Manasse, M.S., McGeoch, L.A., Sleator, D.D.: Competitive algorithms for on-line problems. In: 20th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pp. 322–333 (1988)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Manasse, M.S., McGeoch, L.A., Sleator, D.D.: Competitive algorithms for server problems. Journal of Algorithms 11(2), 208–230 (1990)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sleator, D.D., Tarjan, R.E.: Amortized efficiency of list update and paging rules. Communications of the ACM 28(2), 202–208 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joan Boyar
    • 1
  • Sandy Irani
    • 2
  • Kim S. Larsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdense MDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations