Lower Bounds for the Smoothed Number of Pareto Optimal Solutions

  • Tobias Brunsch
  • Heiko Röglin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6648)


In 2009, Röglin and Teng showed that the smoothed number of Pareto optimal solutions of linear multi-criteria optimization problems is polynomially bounded in the number n of variables and the maximum density φ of the semi-random input model for any fixed number of objective functions. Their bound is, however, not very practical because the exponents grow exponentially in the number d + 1 of objective functions. In a recent breakthrough, Moitra and O’Donnell improved this bound significantly to \(O \big ( n^{2d} \phi^{d(d+1)/2}\big )\).

An “intriguing problem”, which Moitra and O’Donnell formulate in their paper, is how much further this bound can be improved. The previous lower bounds do not exclude the possibility of a polynomial upper bound whose degree does not depend on d. In this paper we resolve this question by constructing a class of instances with Ω( (n φ)(d − logd) ·(1 − Θ1/φ) ) Pareto optimal solutions in expectation. For the bi-criteria case we present a higher lower bound of Ω( n 2 φ 1 − Θ1/φ ), which almost matches the known upper bound of O( n 2 φ).


Maximum Density Knapsack Problem Pareto Optimal Solution Split Step Smooth Number 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [BRV07]
    Beier, R., Röglin, H., Vöcking, B.: The smoothed number of pareto optimal solutions in bicriteria integer optimization. In: Fischetti, M., Williamson, D.P. (eds.) IPCO 2007. LNCS, vol. 4513, pp. 53–67. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [BV04]
    Beier, R., Vöcking, B.: Random knapsack in expected polynomial time. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 69(3), 306–329 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. [Ehr05]
    Ehrgott, M.: Multicriteria Optimization, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [MO10]
    Moitra, A., O’Donnell, R.: Pareto optimal solutions for smoothed analysts. Technical report, CoRR, abs/1011.2249 (2010),; To appear in Proc. of the 43rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC) (2011)
  5. [RT09]
    Röglin, H., Teng, S.-H.: Smoothed analysis of multiobjective optimization. In: Proc. of the 50th Ann. IEEE Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 681–690 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. [ST04]
    Spielman, D.A., Teng, S.-H.: Smoothed analysis of algorithms: Why the simplex algorithm usually takes polynomial time. Journal of the ACM 51(3), 385–463 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. [ST09]
    Spielman, D.A., Teng, S.-H.: Smoothed analysis: an attempt to explain the behavior of algorithms in practice. Communications of the ACM 52(10), 76–84 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tobias Brunsch
    • 1
  • Heiko Röglin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of BonnGermany

Personalised recommendations