Optimally fast incremental Manhattan plane embedding and planar tight span construction

We describe a data structure, a rectangular complex, that can be used to represent hyperconvex metric spaces that have the same topology (although not necessarily the same distance function) as subsets of the plane. We show how to use this data structure to construct the tight span of a metric space given as an n x n distance matrix, when the tight span is homeomorphic to a subset of the plane, in time O(n^2), and to add a single point to a planar tight span in time O(n). As an application of this construction, we show how to test whether a given finite metric space embeds isometrically into the Manhattan plane in time O(n^2), and add a single point to the space and re-test whether it has such an embedding in time O(n).Comment: 39 pages, 15 figure

Quasiconvex Programming

We define quasiconvex programming, a form of generalized linear programming in which one seeks the point minimizing the pointwise maximum of a collection of quasiconvex functions. We survey algorithms for solving quasiconvex programs either numerically or via generalizations of the dual simplex method from linear programming, and describe varied applications of this geometric optimization technique in meshing, scientific computation, information visualization, automated algorithm analysis, and robust statistics.Comment: 33 pages, 14 figure

Three Puzzles on Mathematics, Computation, and Games

In this lecture I will talk about three mathematical puzzles involving mathematics and computation that have preoccupied me over the years. The first puzzle is to understand the amazing success of the simplex algorithm for linear programming. The second puzzle is about errors made when votes are counted during elections. The third puzzle is: are quantum computers possible?Comment: ICM 2018 plenary lecture, Rio de Janeiro, 36 pages, 7 Figure

Colorful Strips

Given a planar point set and an integer $k$, we wish to color the points with $k$ colors so that any axis-aligned strip containing enough points contains all colors. The goal is to bound the necessary size of such a strip, as a function of $k$. We show that if the strip size is at least $2k{-}1$, such a coloring can always be found. We prove that the size of the strip is also bounded in any fixed number of dimensions. In contrast to the planar case, we show that deciding whether a 3D point set can be 2-colored so that any strip containing at least three points contains both colors is NP-complete. We also consider the problem of coloring a given set of axis-aligned strips, so that any sufficiently covered point in the plane is covered by $k$ colors. We show that in $d$ dimensions the required coverage is at most $d(k{-}1)+1$. Lower bounds are given for the two problems. This complements recent impossibility results on decomposition of strip coverings with arbitrary orientations. Finally, we study a variant where strips are replaced by wedges

From Gap-ETH to FPT-Inapproximability: Clique, Dominating Set, and More

We consider questions that arise from the intersection between the areas of polynomial-time approximation algorithms, subexponential-time algorithms, and fixed-parameter tractable algorithms. The questions, which have been asked several times (e.g., [Marx08, FGMS12, DF13]), are whether there is a non-trivial FPT-approximation algorithm for the Maximum Clique (Clique) and Minimum Dominating Set (DomSet) problems parameterized by the size of the optimal solution. In particular, letting $\text{OPT}$ be the optimum and $N$ be the size of the input, is there an algorithm that runs in $t(\text{OPT})\text{poly}(N)$ time and outputs a solution of size $f(\text{OPT})$, for any functions $t$ and $f$ that are independent of $N$ (for Clique, we want $f(\text{OPT})=\omega(1)$)? In this paper, we show that both Clique and DomSet admit no non-trivial FPT-approximation algorithm, i.e., there is no $o(\text{OPT})$-FPT-approximation algorithm for Clique and no $f(\text{OPT})$-FPT-approximation algorithm for DomSet, for any function $f$ (e.g., this holds even if $f$ is the Ackermann function). In fact, our results imply something even stronger: The best way to solve Clique and DomSet, even approximately, is to essentially enumerate all possibilities. Our results hold under the Gap Exponential Time Hypothesis (Gap-ETH) [Dinur16, MR16], which states that no $2^{o(n)}$-time algorithm can distinguish between a satisfiable 3SAT formula and one which is not even $(1 - \epsilon)$-satisfiable for some constant $\epsilon > 0$. Besides Clique and DomSet, we also rule out non-trivial FPT-approximation for Maximum Balanced Biclique, Maximum Subgraphs with Hereditary Properties, and Maximum Induced Matching in bipartite graphs. Additionally, we rule out $k^{o(1)}$-FPT-approximation algorithm for Densest $k$-Subgraph although this ratio does not yet match the trivial $O(k)$-approximation algorithm.Comment: 43 pages. To appear in FOCS'1