The Advice Complexity of a Class of Hard Online Problems

The advice complexity of an online problem is a measure of how much knowledge of the future an online algorithm needs in order to achieve a certain competitive ratio. Using advice complexity, we define the first online complexity class, AOC. The class includes independent set, vertex cover, dominating set, and several others as complete problems. AOC-complete problems are hard, since a single wrong answer by the online algorithm can have devastating consequences. For each of these problems, we show that $\log\left(1+(c-1)^{c-1}/c^{c}\right)n=\Theta (n/c)$ bits of advice are necessary and sufficient (up to an additive term of $O(\log n)$) to achieve a competitive ratio of $c$. The results are obtained by introducing a new string guessing problem related to those of Emek et al. (TCS 2011) and B\"ockenhauer et al. (TCS 2014). It turns out that this gives a powerful but easy-to-use method for providing both upper and lower bounds on the advice complexity of an entire class of online problems, the AOC-complete problems. Previous results of Halld\'orsson et al. (TCS 2002) on online independent set, in a related model, imply that the advice complexity of the problem is $\Theta (n/c)$. Our results improve on this by providing an exact formula for the higher-order term. For online disjoint path allocation, B\"ockenhauer et al. (ISAAC 2009) gave a lower bound of $\Omega (n/c)$ and an upper bound of $O((n\log c)/c)$ on the advice complexity. We improve on the upper bound by a factor of $\log c$. For the remaining problems, no bounds on their advice complexity were previously known.Comment: Full paper to appear in Theory of Computing Systems. A preliminary version appeared in STACS 201

Efficient Rebalancing of Chromatic Search Trees

In PODS'91, Nurmi and Soisalon-Soininen presented a new type of binary search tree for databases, which they call a chromatic tree. The aim is to improve runtime performance by allowing a greater degree of concurrency, which, in turn, is obtained by uncoupling updating from rebalancing. This also allows rebalancing to be postponed completely or partially until after peak working hours.The advantages of the proposal of Nurmi and Soisalon-Soininen are quite significant, but there are definite problems with it. First, they give no explicit upper bound on the complexity of their algorithm. Second, some of their rebalancing operations can be applied many more times than necessary. Third, some of their operations, when removing one problem, create another.We define a new set of rebalancing operations which we prove give rise to at most I_ log_2(N+1) _I - 1 $ rebalancing operations per insertion and at most I_ log_2 (N+1)_I - 2 rebalancing operations per deletion, where N is the maximum'size the tree could ever have, given its initial size and the number of insertions performed. Most of these rebalancing operations, in fact, do no restructuring; they simply move weights around. The number of operations which actually change the structure of the tree is at most one per update

Efficient Rebalancing of Chromatic Search Trees

In PODS'91, Nurmi and Soisalon-Soininen presented a new type of binary search tree for databases, which they call a chromatic tree. The aim is to improve runtime performance by allowing a greater degree of concurrency, which, in turn, is obtained by uncoupling updating from rebalancing. This also allows rebalancing to be postponed completely or partially until after peak working hours.The advantages of the proposal of Nurmi and Soisalon-Soininen are quite significant, but there are definite problems with it. First, they give no explicit upper bound on the complexity of their algorithm. Second, some of their rebalancing operations can be applied many more times than necessary. Third, some of their operations, when removing one problem, create another.We define a new set of rebalancing operations which we prove give rise to at most I_ log_2(N+1) _I - 1 $ rebalancing operations per insertion and at most I_ log_2 (N+1)_I - 2 rebalancing operations per deletion, where N is the maximum'size the tree could ever have, given its initial size and the number of insertions performed. Most of these rebalancing operations, in fact, do no restructuring; they simply move weights around. The number of operations which actually change the structure of the tree is at most one per update

Online Bin Packing with Advice

We consider the online bin packing problem under the advice complexity model where the 'online constraint' is relaxed and an algorithm receives partial information about the future requests. We provide tight upper and lower bounds for the amount of advice an algorithm needs to achieve an optimal packing. We also introduce an algorithm that, when provided with log n + o(log n) bits of advice, achieves a competitive ratio of 3/2 for the general problem. This algorithm is simple and is expected to find real-world applications. We introduce another algorithm that receives 2n + o(n) bits of advice and achieves a competitive ratio of 4/3 + {\epsilon}. Finally, we provide a lower bound argument that implies that advice of linear size is required for an algorithm to achieve a competitive ratio better than 9/8.Comment: 19 pages, 1 figure (2 subfigures