Designing Networks with Good Equilibria under Uncertainty

We consider the problem of designing network cost-sharing protocols with good equilibria under uncertainty. The underlying game is a multicast game in a rooted undirected graph with nonnegative edge costs. A set of k terminal vertices or players need to establish connectivity with the root. The social optimum is the Minimum Steiner Tree. We are interested in situations where the designer has incomplete information about the input. We propose two different models, the adversarial and the stochastic. In both models, the designer has prior knowledge of the underlying metric but the requested subset of the players is not known and is activated either in an adversarial manner (adversarial model) or is drawn from a known probability distribution (stochastic model). In the adversarial model, the designer's goal is to choose a single, universal protocol that has low Price of Anarchy (PoA) for all possible requested subsets of players. The main question we address is: to what extent can prior knowledge of the underlying metric help in the design? We first demonstrate that there exist graphs (outerplanar) where knowledge of the underlying metric can dramatically improve the performance of good network design. Then, in our main technical result, we show that there exist graph metrics, for which knowing the underlying metric does not help and any universal protocol has PoA of $\Omega(\log k)$, which is tight. We attack this problem by developing new techniques that employ powerful tools from extremal combinatorics, and more specifically Ramsey Theory in high dimensional hypercubes. Then we switch to the stochastic model, where each player is independently activated. We show that there exists a randomized ordered protocol that achieves constant PoA. By using standard derandomization techniques, we produce a deterministic ordered protocol with constant PoA.Comment: This version has additional results about stochastic inpu

Steiner Distance in Product Networks

For a connected graph $G$ of order at least $2$ and $S\subseteq V(G)$, the \emph{Steiner distance} $d_G(S)$ among the vertices of $S$ is the minimum size among all connected subgraphs whose vertex sets contain $S$. Let $n$ and $k$ be two integers with $2\leq k\leq n$. Then the \emph{Steiner $k$-eccentricity $e_k(v)$} of a vertex $v$ of $G$ is defined by $e_k(v)=\max \{d_G(S)\,|\,S\subseteq V(G), \ |S|=k, \ and \ v\in S\}$. Furthermore, the \emph{Steiner $k$-diameter} of $G$ is $sdiam_k(G)=\max \{e_k(v)\,|\, v\in V(G)\}$. In this paper, we investigate the Steiner distance and Steiner $k$-diameter of Cartesian and lexicographical product graphs. Also, we study the Steiner $k$-diameter of some networks.Comment: 29 pages, 4 figure

Optimal expression evaluation for data parallel architectures

A data parallel machine represents an array or other composite data structure by allocating one processor (at least conceptually) per data item. A pointwise operation can be performed between two such arrays in unit time, provided their corresponding elements are allocated in the same processors. If the arrays are not aligned in this fashion, the cost of moving one or both of them is part of the cost of the operation. The choice of where to perform the operation then affects this cost. If an expression with several operands is to be evaluated, there may be many choices of where to perform the intermediate operations. An efficient algorithm is given to find the minimum-cost way to evaluate an expression, for several different data parallel architectures. This algorithm applies to any architecture in which the metric describing the cost of moving an array is robust. This encompasses most of the common data parallel communication architectures, including meshes of arbitrary dimension and hypercubes. Remarks are made on several variations of the problem, some of which are solved and some of which remain open

A Parallel Algorithm for Exact Bayesian Structure Discovery in Bayesian Networks

Exact Bayesian structure discovery in Bayesian networks requires exponential time and space. Using dynamic programming (DP), the fastest known sequential algorithm computes the exact posterior probabilities of structural features in $O(2(d+1)n2^n)$ time and space, if the number of nodes (variables) in the Bayesian network is $n$ and the in-degree (the number of parents) per node is bounded by a constant $d$. Here we present a parallel algorithm capable of computing the exact posterior probabilities for all $n(n-1)$ edges with optimal parallel space efficiency and nearly optimal parallel time efficiency. That is, if $p=2^k$ processors are used, the run-time reduces to $O(5(d+1)n2^{n-k}+k(n-k)^d)$ and the space usage becomes $O(n2^{n-k})$ per processor. Our algorithm is based the observation that the subproblems in the sequential DP algorithm constitute a $n$-$D$ hypercube. We take a delicate way to coordinate the computation of correlated DP procedures such that large amount of data exchange is suppressed. Further, we develop parallel techniques for two variants of the well-known \emph{zeta transform}, which have applications outside the context of Bayesian networks. We demonstrate the capability of our algorithm on datasets with up to 33 variables and its scalability on up to 2048 processors. We apply our algorithm to a biological data set for discovering the yeast pheromone response pathways.Comment: 32 pages, 12 figure

An ETH-Tight Exact Algorithm for Euclidean TSP

We study exact algorithms for {\sc Euclidean TSP} in $\mathbb{R}^d$. In the early 1990s algorithms with $n^{O(\sqrt{n})}$ running time were presented for the planar case, and some years later an algorithm with $n^{O(n^{1-1/d})}$ running time was presented for any $d\geq 2$. Despite significant interest in subexponential exact algorithms over the past decade, there has been no progress on {\sc Euclidean TSP}, except for a lower bound stating that the problem admits no $2^{O(n^{1-1/d-\epsilon})}$ algorithm unless ETH fails. Up to constant factors in the exponent, we settle the complexity of {\sc Euclidean TSP} by giving a $2^{O(n^{1-1/d})}$ algorithm and by showing that a $2^{o(n^{1-1/d})}$ algorithm does not exist unless ETH fails.Comment: To appear in FOCS 201