Scheduling-LPs bear probabilities randomized approximations for min-sum criteria

  • Andreas S. Schulz
  • Martin Skutella
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1284)

Abstract

In this paper, we provide a new class of randomized approximation algorithms for scheduling problems by directly interpreting solutions to so-called time-indexed LPs as probabilities. The most general model we consider is scheduling unrelated parallel machines with release dates (or even network scheduling) so as to minimize the average weighted completion time. The crucial idea for these multiple machine problems is not to use standard list scheduling but rather to assign jobs randomly to machines (with probabilities taken from an optimal LP solution) and to perform list scheduling on each of them.

For the general model, we give a (2+ E)-approximation algorithm. The best previously known approximation algorithm has a performance guarantee of 16/3 [HSW96]. Moreover, our algorithm also improves upon the best previously known approximation algorithms for the special case of identical parallel machine scheduling (performance guarantee (2.89 + E) in general [CPS+96] and 2.85 for the average completion time [CMNS97], respectively). A perhaps surprising implication for identical parallel machines is that jobs are randomly assigned to machines, in which each machine is equally likely. In addition, in this case the algorithm has running time O(nlogn) and performance guarantee 2. The same algorithm also is a 2-approximation for the corresponding preemptive scheduling problem on identical parallel machines.

Finally, the results for identical parallel machine scheduling apply to both the off-line and the on-line settings with no difference in performance guarantees. In the on-line setting, we are scheduling jobs that continually arrive to be processed and, for each time t, we must construct the schedule until time t without any knowledge of the jobs that will arrive afterwards.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [AKP92]
    B. Awerbuch, S. Kutten, and D. Peleg. Competitive distributed job scheduling. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pages 571–581, 1992.Google Scholar
  2. [BCS74]
    J. L. Bruno, E. G. Coffman Jr., and R. Sethi. Scheduling independent tasks to reduce mean finishing time. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 17:382–387, 1974.Google Scholar
  3. [CJM+96]
    C. S. Chekuri, R. Johnson, R. Motwani, B. K. Natarajan, B. R. Rau, and M. Schlansker. Profile-driven instruction level parallel scheduling with applications to super blocks. December 1996. Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO-29), Paris, France.Google Scholar
  4. [CM96]
    S. Chakrabarti and S. Muthukrishnan. Resource scheduling for parallel database and scientific applications. June 1996. Proceedings of the 8th ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures.Google Scholar
  5. [CMNS97]
    C. S. Chekurï, R. Motwani, B. Natarajan, and C. Stein. Approximation techniques for average completion time scheduling. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 609–618, 1997.Google Scholar
  6. [CPS+96]
    S. Chakrabarti, C. A. Phillips, A. S. Schulz, D. B. Shmoys, C. Stein, and J. Wein. Improved scheduling algorithms for minsum criteria. In F. Meyer auf der Heide and B. Monien, editors, Automata, Languages and Programming, number 1099 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 646–657. Springer, Berlin, 1996. Proceedings of the 23rd International Colloquium (ICALP'96).Google Scholar
  7. [CS97]
    F A. Chudak and D. B. Shmoys. Approximation algorithms for precedenceconstrained scheduling problems on parallel machines that run at different speeds. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 581–590,1997.Google Scholar
  8. [DLLX90]
    X. Deng, H. Liu, J. Long, and B. Xiao. Deterministic load balancing in computer networks. In Proceedings of the 2nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, pages 50–57, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. [DW90]
    M. E. Dyer and L. A. Wolsey. Formulating the single machine sequencing problem with release dates as a mixed integer program. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 26:255–270, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. [ES73]
    P. Erdas and J. L. Selfridge. On a combinatorial game. Journal of Combinatorial Theory A, 14:298–301, 1973.Google Scholar
  11. [GLLRK79]
    R. L. Graham, E. L. Lawler, J. K. Lenstra, and A. H. G. Rinnooy Kan. Optimization and approximation in deterministic sequencing and scheduling: A survey. Annals of Discrete Mathematics, 5:287–326, 1979.Google Scholar
  12. [Goe96]
    M. X. Goemans. A supermodular relaxation for scheduling with release dates. In W. H. Cunningham, S. T. McCormick, and M. Queyranne, editors, Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization, number 1084 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 288–300. Springer, Berlin, 1996. Proceedings of the 5th International IPCO Conference.Google Scholar
  13. [Goe97]
    M. X. Goemans. Improved approximation algorithms for scheduling with release dates. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 591–598, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. [GQS+97]
    M. X. Goemans, M. Queyranne, A. S. Schulz, M. Skutella, and Y Wang, 1997. In preparation.Google Scholar
  15. [HSSW96]
    L. A. Hall, A. S. Schulz, D. B. Shmoys, and J. Wein. Scheduling to minimize average completion time: Off-line and on-line approximation algorithms. Preprint 516/1996, Department of Mathematics, Technical University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 1996. To appear in Mathematics of Operations Research.Google Scholar
  16. [HSW96]
    L. A. Hall, D. B. Shmoys, and J. Wein. Scheduling to minimize average completion time: Off-line and on-line algorithms. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 142–151, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. [KK86]
    T. Kawaguchi and S. Kyan. Worst case bound of an LRF schedule for the mean weighted flow-time problem. SIAM Journal on Computing, 15:1119–1129, 1986.Google Scholar
  18. [LRKB77]
    J. K. Lenstra, A. H. G. Rinnooy Kan, and P. Brucker. Complexity of machine scheduling problems. Annals of Discrete Mathematics, 1:343–362, 1977.Google Scholar
  19. [MNR96]
    R. Motwani, J. Naor, and P Raghavan. Randomized approximation algorithms in combinatorial optimization. In D. S. Hochbaum, editor, Approximation Algorithms for NP-Hard Problems, chapter 11. Thomson, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. [MR95]
    R. Motwani and P Raghavan. Randomized Algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  21. [MSS96]
    R. H. Möhring, M. W. Schäffter, and A. S. Schulz. Scheduling jobs with communication delays: Using infeasible solutions for approximation. In J. Diaz and M. Serna, editors, Algorithms-ESA'96, volume 1136 of Lecture Notes in Com puter Science, pages 76–90. Springer, Berlin, 1996. Proceedings of the 4th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms.Google Scholar
  22. [PSW94]
    C. Phillips, C. Stein, and J. Wein. Task scheduling in networks. In Algorithm Theory-SWAT'94, number 824 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 290–301. Springer, Berlin, 1994. Proceedings of the 4th Scandinavian Workshop on Algorithm Theory.Google Scholar
  23. [PSW95]
    C. Phillips, C. Stein, and J. Wein. Scheduling jobs that arrive over time. In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Algorithms and Data Structures, number 955 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 86–97. Springer, Berlin, 1995.Google Scholar
  24. [RT87]
    P. Raghavan and C. D. Thompson. Randomized rounding: A technique for provably good algorithms and algorithmic proofs. Combinatorica, 7:365–374, 1987.Google Scholar
  25. [Sch96]
    A. S. Schulz. Scheduling to minimize total weighted completion time: Performance guarantees of LP-based heuristics and lower bounds. In W. H. Cunningham, S. T. McCormick, and M. Queyranne, editors, Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization, number 1084 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 301–315. Springer, Berlin, 1996. Proceedings of the 5th International IPCO Conference.Google Scholar
  26. [Spe87]
    J. Spencer. Ten Lectures on the Probabilistic Method. Number 52 in CBMS-NSF Reg. Conf. Ser. Appl. Math. SIAM, 1987.Google Scholar
  27. [SS97]
    A. S. Schulz and M. Skutella. Random-based scheduling: New approximations and LP lower bounds. Preprint 549/1997, Department of Mathematics, Technical University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany, February 1997. To appear in Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Randomization and Approximation Techniques in Computer Science (Random' 97).Google Scholar
  28. [ST93]
    D. B. Shmoys and É. Tardos. An approximation algorithm for the generalized assignment problem. Mathematical Programming, 62:461–474, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas S. Schulz
    • 1
  • Martin Skutella
    • 1
  1. 1.Fachbereich MathematikTechnische Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations