Weighted Matchings via Unweighted Augmentations

We design a generic method for reducing the task of finding weighted matchings to that of finding short augmenting paths in unweighted graphs. This method enables us to provide efficient implementations for approximating weighted matchings in the streaming model and in the massively parallel computation (MPC) model. In the context of streaming with random edge arrivals, our techniques yield a $(1/2+c)$-approximation algorithm thus breaking the natural barrier of $1/2$. For multi-pass streaming and the MPC model, we show that any algorithm computing a $(1-\delta)$-approximate unweighted matching in bipartite graphs can be translated into an algorithm that computes a $(1-\varepsilon(\delta))$-approximate maximum weighted matching. Furthermore, this translation incurs only a constant factor (that depends on $\varepsilon> 0$) overhead in the complexity. Instantiating this with the current best multi-pass streaming and MPC algorithms for unweighted matchings yields the following results for maximum weighted matchings: * A $(1-\varepsilon)$-approximation streaming algorithm that uses $O_\varepsilon(1)$ passes and $O_\varepsilon(n\, \text{poly} (\log n))$ memory. This is the first $(1-\varepsilon)$-approximation streaming algorithm for weighted matchings that uses a constant number of passes (only depending on $\varepsilon$). * A $(1 - \varepsilon)$-approximation algorithm in the MPC model that uses $O_\varepsilon(\log \log n)$ rounds, $O(m/n)$ machines per round, and $O_\varepsilon(n\, \text{poly}(\log n))$ memory per machine. This improves upon the previous best approximation guarantee of $(1/2-\varepsilon)$ for weighted graphs

Sublinear Estimation of Weighted Matchings in Dynamic Data Streams

This paper presents an algorithm for estimating the weight of a maximum weighted matching by augmenting any estimation routine for the size of an unweighted matching. The algorithm is implementable in any streaming model including dynamic graph streams. We also give the first constant estimation for the maximum matching size in a dynamic graph stream for planar graphs (or any graph with bounded arboricity) using $\tilde{O}(n^{4/5})$ space which also extends to weighted matching. Using previous results by Kapralov, Khanna, and Sudan (2014) we obtain a $\mathrm{polylog}(n)$ approximation for general graphs using $\mathrm{polylog}(n)$ space in random order streams, respectively. In addition, we give a space lower bound of $\Omega(n^{1-\varepsilon})$ for any randomized algorithm estimating the size of a maximum matching up to a $1+O(\varepsilon)$ factor for adversarial streams

Distributed Maximum Matching in Bounded Degree Graphs

We present deterministic distributed algorithms for computing approximate maximum cardinality matchings and approximate maximum weight matchings. Our algorithm for the unweighted case computes a matching whose size is at least (1-\eps) times the optimal in \Delta^{O(1/\eps)} + O\left(\frac{1}{\eps^2}\right) \cdot\log^*(n) rounds where $n$ is the number of vertices in the graph and $\Delta$ is the maximum degree. Our algorithm for the edge-weighted case computes a matching whose weight is at least (1-\eps) times the optimal in \log(\min\{1/\wmin,n/\eps\})^{O(1/\eps)}\cdot(\Delta^{O(1/\eps)}+\log^*(n)) rounds for edge-weights in [\wmin,1]. The best previous algorithms for both the unweighted case and the weighted case are by Lotker, Patt-Shamir, and Pettie~(SPAA 2008). For the unweighted case they give a randomized (1-\eps)-approximation algorithm that runs in O((\log(n)) /\eps^3) rounds. For the weighted case they give a randomized (1/2-\eps)-approximation algorithm that runs in O(\log(\eps^{-1}) \cdot \log(n)) rounds. Hence, our results improve on the previous ones when the parameters $\Delta$, \eps and \wmin are constants (where we reduce the number of runs from $O(\log(n))$ to $O(\log^*(n))$), and more generally when $\Delta$, 1/\eps and 1/\wmin are sufficiently slowly increasing functions of $n$. Moreover, our algorithms are deterministic rather than randomized.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1402.379

Streaming Verification of Graph Properties

Streaming interactive proofs (SIPs) are a framework for outsourced computation. A computationally limited streaming client (the verifier) hands over a large data set to an untrusted server (the prover) in the cloud and the two parties run a protocol to confirm the correctness of result with high probability. SIPs are particularly interesting for problems that are hard to solve (or even approximate) well in a streaming setting. The most notable of these problems is finding maximum matchings, which has received intense interest in recent years but has strong lower bounds even for constant factor approximations. In this paper, we present efficient streaming interactive proofs that can verify maximum matchings exactly. Our results cover all flavors of matchings (bipartite/non-bipartite and weighted). In addition, we also present streaming verifiers for approximate metric TSP. In particular, these are the first efficient results for weighted matchings and for metric TSP in any streaming verification model.Comment: 26 pages, 2 figure, 1 tabl

Coresets Meet EDCS: Algorithms for Matching and Vertex Cover on Massive Graphs

As massive graphs become more prevalent, there is a rapidly growing need for scalable algorithms that solve classical graph problems, such as maximum matching and minimum vertex cover, on large datasets. For massive inputs, several different computational models have been introduced, including the streaming model, the distributed communication model, and the massively parallel computation (MPC) model that is a common abstraction of MapReduce-style computation. In each model, algorithms are analyzed in terms of resources such as space used or rounds of communication needed, in addition to the more traditional approximation ratio. In this paper, we give a single unified approach that yields better approximation algorithms for matching and vertex cover in all these models. The highlights include: * The first one pass, significantly-better-than-2-approximation for matching in random arrival streams that uses subquadratic space, namely a $(1.5+\epsilon)$-approximation streaming algorithm that uses $O(n^{1.5})$ space for constant $\epsilon > 0$. * The first 2-round, better-than-2-approximation for matching in the MPC model that uses subquadratic space per machine, namely a $(1.5+\epsilon)$-approximation algorithm with $O(\sqrt{mn} + n)$ memory per machine for constant $\epsilon > 0$. By building on our unified approach, we further develop parallel algorithms in the MPC model that give a $(1 + \epsilon)$-approximation to matching and an $O(1)$-approximation to vertex cover in only $O(\log\log{n})$ MPC rounds and $O(n/poly\log{(n)})$ memory per machine. These results settle multiple open questions posed in the recent paper of Czumaj~et.al. [STOC 2018]

Fine-grained dichotomies for the Tutte plane and Boolean #CSP

Jaeger, Vertigan, and Welsh [15] proved a dichotomy for the complexity of evaluating the Tutte polynomial at fixed points: The evaluation is #P-hard almost everywhere, and the remaining points admit polynomial-time algorithms. Dell, Husfeldt, and Wahl\'en [9] and Husfeldt and Taslaman [12], in combination with Curticapean [7], extended the #P-hardness results to tight lower bounds under the counting exponential time hypothesis #ETH, with the exception of the line $y=1$, which was left open. We complete the dichotomy theorem for the Tutte polynomial under #ETH by proving that the number of all acyclic subgraphs of a given $n$-vertex graph cannot be determined in time $exp(o(n))$ unless #ETH fails. Another dichotomy theorem we strengthen is the one of Creignou and Hermann [6] for counting the number of satisfying assignments to a constraint satisfaction problem instance over the Boolean domain. We prove that all #P-hard cases are also hard under #ETH. The main ingredient is to prove that the number of independent sets in bipartite graphs with $n$ vertices cannot be computed in time $exp(o(n))$ unless #ETH fails. In order to prove our results, we use the block interpolation idea by Curticapean [7] and transfer it to systems of linear equations that might not directly correspond to interpolation.Comment: 16 pages, 1 figur