Local Guarantees in Graph Cuts and Clustering

Correlation Clustering is an elegant model that captures fundamental graph cut problems such as Min $s-t$ Cut, Multiway Cut, and Multicut, extensively studied in combinatorial optimization. Here, we are given a graph with edges labeled $+$ or $-$ and the goal is to produce a clustering that agrees with the labels as much as possible: $+$ edges within clusters and $-$ edges across clusters. The classical approach towards Correlation Clustering (and other graph cut problems) is to optimize a global objective. We depart from this and study local objectives: minimizing the maximum number of disagreements for edges incident on a single node, and the analogous max min agreements objective. This naturally gives rise to a family of basic min-max graph cut problems. A prototypical representative is Min Max $s-t$ Cut: find an $s-t$ cut minimizing the largest number of cut edges incident on any node. We present the following results: $(1)$ an $O(\sqrt{n})$-approximation for the problem of minimizing the maximum total weight of disagreement edges incident on any node (thus providing the first known approximation for the above family of min-max graph cut problems), $(2)$ a remarkably simple $7$-approximation for minimizing local disagreements in complete graphs (improving upon the previous best known approximation of $48$), and $(3)$ a $1/(2+\varepsilon)$-approximation for maximizing the minimum total weight of agreement edges incident on any node, hence improving upon the $1/(4+\varepsilon)$-approximation that follows from the study of approximate pure Nash equilibria in cut and party affiliation games

On Deterministic Sketching and Streaming for Sparse Recovery and Norm Estimation

We study classic streaming and sparse recovery problems using deterministic linear sketches, including l1/l1 and linf/l1 sparse recovery problems (the latter also being known as l1-heavy hitters), norm estimation, and approximate inner product. We focus on devising a fixed matrix A in R^{m x n} and a deterministic recovery/estimation procedure which work for all possible input vectors simultaneously. Our results improve upon existing work, the following being our main contributions: * A proof that linf/l1 sparse recovery and inner product estimation are equivalent, and that incoherent matrices can be used to solve both problems. Our upper bound for the number of measurements is m=O(eps^{-2}*min{log n, (log n / log(1/eps))^2}). We can also obtain fast sketching and recovery algorithms by making use of the Fast Johnson-Lindenstrauss transform. Both our running times and number of measurements improve upon previous work. We can also obtain better error guarantees than previous work in terms of a smaller tail of the input vector. * A new lower bound for the number of linear measurements required to solve l1/l1 sparse recovery. We show Omega(k/eps^2 + klog(n/k)/eps) measurements are required to recover an x' with |x - x'|_1 <= (1+eps)|x_{tail(k)}|_1, where x_{tail(k)} is x projected onto all but its largest k coordinates in magnitude. * A tight bound of m = Theta(eps^{-2}log(eps^2 n)) on the number of measurements required to solve deterministic norm estimation, i.e., to recover |x|_2 +/- eps|x|_1. For all the problems we study, tight bounds are already known for the randomized complexity from previous work, except in the case of l1/l1 sparse recovery, where a nearly tight bound is known. Our work thus aims to study the deterministic complexities of these problems

Cluster Editing: Kernelization based on Edge Cuts

Kernelization algorithms for the {\sc cluster editing} problem have been a popular topic in the recent research in parameterized computation. Thus far most kernelization algorithms for this problem are based on the concept of {\it critical cliques}. In this paper, we present new observations and new techniques for the study of kernelization algorithms for the {\sc cluster editing} problem. Our techniques are based on the study of the relationship between {\sc cluster editing} and graph edge-cuts. As an application, we present an ${\cal O}(n^2)$-time algorithm that constructs a $2k$ kernel for the {\it weighted} version of the {\sc cluster editing} problem. Our result meets the best kernel size for the unweighted version for the {\sc cluster editing} problem, and significantly improves the previous best kernel of quadratic size for the weighted version of the problem

Exact Weight Subgraphs and the k-Sum Conjecture

We consider the Exact-Weight-H problem of finding a (not necessarily induced) subgraph H of weight 0 in an edge-weighted graph G. We show that for every H, the complexity of this problem is strongly related to that of the infamous k-Sum problem. In particular, we show that under the k-Sum Conjecture, we can achieve tight upper and lower bounds for the Exact-Weight-H problem for various subgraphs H such as matching, star, path, and cycle. One interesting consequence is that improving on the O(n^3) upper bound for Exact-Weight-4-Path or Exact-Weight-5-Path will imply improved algorithms for 3-Sum, 5-Sum, All-Pairs Shortest Paths and other fundamental problems. This is in sharp contrast to the minimum-weight and (unweighted) detection versions, which can be solved easily in time O(n^2). We also show that a faster algorithm for any of the following three problems would yield faster algorithms for the others: 3-Sum, Exact-Weight-3-Matching, and Exact-Weight-3-Star

Improved Parameterized Algorithms for the Kemeny Aggregation Problem

We give improvements over fixed parameter tractable (FPT) algo-rithms to solve the Kemeny aggregation problem, where the task is to summarize a multi-set of preference lists, called votes, over a set of alternatives, called candidates, into a single preference list that has the minimum total τ-distance from the votes. The τ-distance between two preference lists is the number of pairs of candidates that are or-dered differently in the two lists. We study the problem for preference lists that are total orders. We develop algorithms of running times O∗(1.403kt), O∗(5.823kt/m) ≤ O∗(5.823kavg) and O∗(4.829kmax) for the problem, ignoring the polynomial factors in the O ∗ notation, where kt is the optimum total τ-distance, m is the number of votes, and kavg (resp, kmax) is the average (resp, maximum) over pairwise τ-distances of votes. Our algorithms improve the best previously known running times of O∗(1.53kt) and O∗(16kavg) ≤ O∗(16kmax) [4, 5], which also implies an O∗(164kt/m) running time. We also show how to enumerate all optimal solutions in O∗(36kt/m) ≤ O∗(36kavg) time.

User-friendly tail bounds for sums of random matrices

This paper presents new probability inequalities for sums of independent, random, self-adjoint matrices. These results place simple and easily verifiable hypotheses on the summands, and they deliver strong conclusions about the large-deviation behavior of the maximum eigenvalue of the sum. Tail bounds for the norm of a sum of random rectangular matrices follow as an immediate corollary. The proof techniques also yield some information about matrix-valued martingales. In other words, this paper provides noncommutative generalizations of the classical bounds associated with the names Azuma, Bennett, Bernstein, Chernoff, Hoeffding, and McDiarmid. The matrix inequalities promise the same diversity of application, ease of use, and strength of conclusion that have made the scalar inequalities so valuable.Comment: Current paper is the version of record. The material on Freedman's inequality has been moved to a separate note; other martingale bounds are described in Caltech ACM Report 2011-0

How managed a market? Modes of commissioning in England and Germany

Background: In quasi-markets governance over healthcare providers is mediated by commissioners. Different commissioners apply different combinations of six methods of control (’media of power’) for exercising governance: managerial performance, negotiation, discursive control, incentives, competition and juridical control. This paper compares how English and German healthcare commissioners do so. Methods: Systematic comparison of observational national-level case studies in terms of six media of power, using data from multiple sources. Results: The comparison exposes and contrasts two basic generic modes of commissioning: 1. Surrogate planning (English NHS), in which a negotiated order involving micro-commissioning, provider competition, financial incentives and penalties are the dominant media of commissioner power over providers. 2. Case-mix commissioning (Germany), in which managerial performance, an ‘episode based’ negotiated order and juridical controls appear the dominant media of commissioner power. Conclusions: Governments do not necessarily maximise commissioners’ power over providers by implementing as many media of power as possible because these media interact, some complementing and others inhibiting each other. In particular, patient choice of provider inhibits commissioners’ use of provider competition as a means of control