Relative Interval Analysis of Paging Algorithms on Access Graphs

Access graphs, which have been used previously in connection with competitive analysis and relative worst order analysis to model locality of reference in paging, are considered in connection with relative interval analysis. The algorithms LRU, FIFO, FWF, and FAR are compared using the path, star, and cycle access graphs. In this model, some of the expected results are obtained. However, although LRU is found to be strictly better than FIFO on paths, it has worse performance on stars, cycles, and complete graphs, in this model. We solve an open question from [Dorrigiv, Lopez-Ortiz, Munro, 2009], obtaining tight bounds on the relationship between LRU and FIFO with relative interval analysis.Comment: IMADA-preprint-c

The Frequent Items Problem in Online Streaming under Various Performance Measures

In this paper, we strengthen the competitive analysis results obtained for a fundamental online streaming problem, the Frequent Items Problem. Additionally, we contribute with a more detailed analysis of this problem, using alternative performance measures, supplementing the insight gained from competitive analysis. The results also contribute to the general study of performance measures for online algorithms. It has long been known that competitive analysis suffers from drawbacks in certain situations, and many alternative measures have been proposed. However, more systematic comparative studies of performance measures have been initiated recently, and we continue this work, using competitive analysis, relative interval analysis, and relative worst order analysis on the Frequent Items Problem.Comment: IMADA-preprint-c

Online Bin Covering: Expectations vs. Guarantees

Bin covering is a dual version of classic bin packing. Thus, the goal is to cover as many bins as possible, where covering a bin means packing items of total size at least one in the bin. For online bin covering, competitive analysis fails to distinguish between most algorithms of interest; all "reasonable" algorithms have a competitive ratio of 1/2. Thus, in order to get a better understanding of the combinatorial difficulties in solving this problem, we turn to other performance measures, namely relative worst order, random order, and max/max analysis, as well as analyzing input with restricted or uniformly distributed item sizes. In this way, our study also supplements the ongoing systematic studies of the relative strengths of various performance measures. Two classic algorithms for online bin packing that have natural dual versions are Harmonic and Next-Fit. Even though the algorithms are quite different in nature, the dual versions are not separated by competitive analysis. We make the case that when guarantees are needed, even under restricted input sequences, dual Harmonic is preferable. In addition, we establish quite robust theoretical results showing that if items come from a uniform distribution or even if just the ordering of items is uniformly random, then dual Next-Fit is the right choice.Comment: IMADA-preprint-c