Advertisement

Approximation-Friendly Discrepancy Rounding

  • Nikhil Bansal
  • Viswanath Nagarajan
Chapter

Abstract

Rounding linear programs using techniques from discrepancy is a recent approach that has been very successful in certain settings. However this method also has some limitations when compared to approaches such as randomized and iterative rounding. We provide an extension of the discrepancy-based rounding algorithm due to Lovett–Meka that (i) combines the advantages of both randomized and iterated rounding, (ii) makes it applicable to settings with more general combinatorial structure such as matroids. As applications of this approach, we obtain new results for various classical problems such as linear system rounding, degree-bounded matroid basis and low congestion routing.

References

  1. 1.
    N. Bansal, Constructive algorithms for discrepancy minimization, in Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2010, pp. 3–10Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    N. Bansal, M. Charikar, R. Krishnaswamy, S. Li, Better algorithms and hardness for broadcast scheduling via a discrepancy approach, in SODA, 2014, pp, 55–71Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    N. Bansal, R. Khandekar, J. Könemann, V. Nagarajan, B. Peis, On generalizations of network design problems with degree bounds. Math. Program. 141(1–2), 479–506 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Beck, T. Fiala, Integer-making theorems. Discret. Appl. Math. 3, 1–8 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Charikar, A. Newman, A. Nikolov, Tight hardness results for minimizing discrepancy, in SODA, 2011, pp. 1607–1614zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    C. Chekuri, J. Vondrak, R. Zenklusen, Dependent randomized rounding via exchange properties of combinatorial structures, in FOCS, 2010, pp. 575–584Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D.A. Freedman, On tail probabilities for martingales. Ann. Probab. 3, 100–118 (1975)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    F. Grandoni, R. Ravi, M. Singh, R. Zenklusen, New approaches to multi-objective optimization. Math. Program. 146(1–2), 525–554 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    N.J.A. Harvey, R. Schwartz, M. Singh, Discrepancy without partial colorings, in APPROX/RANDOM, 2014, pp. 258–273Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R.M. Karp, F.T. Leighton, R.L. Rivest, C.D. Thompson, U.V. Vazirani, V.V. Vazirani, Global wire routing in two-dimensional arrays. Algorithmica 2, 113–129 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    T. Király, L.C. Lau, M. Singh, Degree bounded matroids and submodular flows, in IPCO, 2008, pp. 259–272Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L.-C. Lau, R. Ravi, M. Singh, Iterative Methods in Combinatorial Optimization (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    F.T. Leighton, C.J. Lu, S. Rao, A. Srinivasan, New algorithmic aspects of the local lemma with applications to routing and partitioning. SIAM J. Comput. 31(2), 626–641 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. Lovasz, J. Spencer, K. Vesztergombi, Discrepancy of set-systems and matrices. Eur. J. Comb. 7, 151–160 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. Lovett, R. Meka, Constructive discrepancy minimization by walking on the edges, in FOCS, 2012, pp. 61–67Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Matoušek, Geometric Discrepancy: An Illustrated Guide (Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Nikolov, K. Talwar, Approximating hereditary discrepancy via small width ellipsoids, in Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA, 2015, pp. 324–336Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Rothvoss, Approximating bin packing within o(log OPT * log log OPT) bins, in FOCS, 2013, pp. 20–29Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    T. Rothvoss, Constructive discrepancy minimization for convex sets, in IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, 2014, pp. 140–145Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Schrijver, Combinatorial Optimization (Springer, Berlin, 2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Singh, L.C. Lau, Approximating minimum bounded degree spanning trees to within one of optimal, in STOC, 2007, pp. 661–670Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. Spencer, Six standard deviations suffice. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 289(2), 679–706 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    A. Srinivasan, Improving the discrepancy bound for sparse matrices: better approximations for sparse lattice approximation problems, in Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), 1997, pp. 692–701Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    V.V. Vazirani, Approximation Algorithms (Springer, New York, 2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    D. Williamson, D. Shmoys, The Design of Approximation Algorithms (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceEindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenNetherlands
  2. 2.Department of Industrial and Operations EngineeringUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations