Online Bounded Analysis

  • Joan Boyar
  • Leah Epstein
  • Lene M. Favrholdt
  • Kim S. LarsenEmail author
  • Asaf Levin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9691)


Though competitive analysis is often a very good tool for the analysis of online algorithms, sometimes it does not give any insight and sometimes it gives counter-intuitive results. Much work has gone into exploring other performance measures, in particular targeted at what seems to be the core problem with competitive analysis: the comparison of the performance of an online algorithm is made to a too powerful adversary. We consider a new approach to restricting the power of the adversary, by requiring that when judging a given online algorithm, the optimal offline algorithm must perform as well as the online algorithm, not just on the entire final request sequence, but also on any prefix of that sequence. This is limiting the adversary’s usual advantage of being able to exploit that it knows the sequence is continuing beyond the current request. Through a collection of online problems, including machine scheduling, bin packing, dual bin packing, and seat reservation, we investigate the significance of this particular offline advantage.


Greedy Algorithm Competitive Ratio Online Algorithm Identical Machine Competitive Analysis 
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.


  1. 1.
    Albers, S.: On the influence of lookahead in competitive paging algorithms. Algorithmica 18, 283–305 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Albers, S., Favrholdt, L.M., Giel, O.: On paging with locality of reference. In: 34th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 258–267 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Angelopoulos, S., Dorrigiv, R., López-Ortiz, A.: On the separation and equivalence of paging strategies. In: 18th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 229–237 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Azar, Y., Boyar, J., Epstein, L., Favrholdt, L.M., Larsen, K.S., Nielsen, M.N.: Fair versus unrestricted bin packing. Algorithmica 34(2), 181–196 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Azar, Y., Epstein, L.: On-line machine covering. J. Sched. 1(2), 67–77 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Azar, Y., Regev, O.: On-line bin-stretching. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 268(1), 17–41 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bansal, N., Sviridenko, M.: The Santa Claus problem. In: 38th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 31–40 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ben-David, S., Borodin, A.: A new measure for the study of on-line algorithms. Algorithmica 11(1), 73–91 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Borodin, A., Irani, S., Raghavan, P., Schieber, B.: Competitive paging with locality of reference. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 50(2), 244–258 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boyar, J., Epstein, L., Favrholdt, L.M., Larsen, K.S., Levin, A.: Online bounded analysis. CoRR, abs/1602.06708 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boyar, J., Favrholdt, L., Mikkelsen, J., Kudahl, C.: Advice complexity for a class of online problems. In: 32nd International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, vol. 30, pp. 116–129 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boyar, J., Favrholdt, L.M.: The relative worst order ratio for on-line algorithms. ACM Trans. Algorithms 3(2), 24 (2007). article 22MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boyar, J., Favrholdt, L.M., Larsen, K.S., Nielsen, M.N.: Extending the accommodating function. Acta Informatica 40(1), 3–35 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Boyar, J., Larsen, K.: The seat reservation problem. Algorithmica 25, 403–417 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boyar, J., Larsen, K.S., Nielsen, M.N.: The accommodating function–a generalization of the competitive ratio. SIAM J. Comput. 31(1), 233–258 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Breslauer, D.: On competitive on-line paging with lookahead. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 209(1–2), 365–375 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chan, S.-H., Lam, T.-W., Lee, L.-K., Liu, C.-M., Ting, H.-F.: Sleep management on multiple machines for energy and flow time. In: Aceto, L., Henzinger, M., Sgall, J. (eds.) ICALP 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6755, pp. 219–231. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cho, Y., Sahni, S.: Bounds for list schedules on uniform processors. SIAM J. Comput. 9(1), 91–103 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Csirik, J., Totik, V.: On-line algorithms for a dual version of bin packing. Discrete Appl. Math. 21, 163–167 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dorrigiv, R., López-Ortiz, A., Munro, J.I.: On the relative dominance of paging algorithms. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 410, 3694–3701 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ehmsen, M.R., Kohrt, J.S., Larsen, K.S.: List factoring and relative worst order analysis. Algorithmica 66(2), 287–309 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Epstein, L.: Tight bounds for bandwidth allocation on two links. Discrete Appl. Math. 148(2), 181–188 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Epstein, L., Favrholdt, L.M., Kohrt, J.S.: Separating online scheduling algorithms with the relative worst order ratio. J. Comb. Optim. 12(4), 363–386 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Epstein, L., Noga, J., Seiden, S.S., Sgall, J., Woeginger, G.J.: Randomized online scheduling on two uniform machines. In: Tenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 317–326 (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Giannakopoulos, Y., Koutsoupias, E.: Competitive analysis of maintaining frequent items of a stream. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 562, 23–32 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Graham, R.L.: Bounds for certain multiprocessing anomalies. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 45, 1563–1581 (1966)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Karlin, A.R., Manasse, M.S., Rudolph, L., Sleator, D.D.: Competitive snoopy caching. Algorithmica 3, 79–119 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Karlin, A.R., Phillips, S.J., Raghavan, P.: Markov paging. SIAM J. Comput. 30(3), 906–922 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kenyon, C.: Best-fit bin-packing with random order. In: 7th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 359–364 (1996)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Koutsoupias, E., Papadimitriou, C.H.: Beyond competitive analysis. In: 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 394–400 (1994)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Koutsoupias, E., Papadimitriou, C.H.: Beyond competitive analysis. SIAM J. Comput. 30(1), 300–317 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Miyazaki, S., Okamoto, K.: Improving the competitive ratios of the seat reservation problem. In: Calude, C.S., Sassone, V. (eds.) TCS 2010. IFIP AICT, vol. 323, pp. 328–339. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Raghavan, P.: A statistical adversary for on-line algorithms. In: On-Line Algorithms. Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 7, pp. 79–83. American Mathematical Society (1992)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sleator, D.D., Tarjan, R.E.: Amortized efficiency of list update and paging rules. Commun. ACM 28(2), 202–208 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Woeginger, G.J.: A polynomial-time approximation scheme for maximizing the minimum machine completion time. Oper. Res. Lett. 20(4), 149–154 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Young, N.: Competitive paging and dual-guided algorithms for weighted caching and matching (thesis). Technical Report CS-TR-348-91, Computer Science Department, Princeton University (1991)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Young, N.E.: The \(k\)-server dual and loose competitiveness for paging. Algorithmica 11, 525–541 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joan Boyar
    • 1
  • Leah Epstein
    • 2
  • Lene M. Favrholdt
    • 1
  • Kim S. Larsen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Asaf Levin
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael
  3. 3.Faculty of IE&MThe TechnionHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations