Properties of SPT schedules Eric Angel, Evripidis Bampis, Fanny Pascual LaMI, university of Evry, France MISTA 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
On allocations that maximize fairness Uriel Feige Microsoft Research and Weizmann Institute.
Advertisements

Machine scheduling Job 1Job 3 Job 4 Job 5Machine 1 Machine 2 time 0C max Job 2.
1 Chapter 4 Greedy Algorithms Slides by Kevin Wayne. Copyright © 2005 Pearson-Addison Wesley. All rights reserved.
1 Optimal Online Algorithms for Minimax Resource Scheduling Imen BOURGUIBA CAS 744 McMaster University.
Minimum Clique Partition Problem with Constrained Weight for Interval Graphs Jianping Li Department of Mathematics Yunnan University Jointed by M.X. Chen.
Approximation Algorithms
Algorithmic Game Theory and Scheduling Eric Angel, Evripidis Bampis, Fanny Pascual IBISC, University of Evry, France GOTha, 12/05/06, LIP 6.
1 EE5900 Advanced Embedded System For Smart Infrastructure Static Scheduling.
Greedy Algorithms Be greedy! always make the choice that looks best at the moment. Local optimization. Not always yielding a globally optimal solution.
Greedy Algorithms Basic idea Connection to dynamic programming
Truthful Algorithms for Scheduling Selfish Tasks on Parallel Machines Eric Angel, Evripidis Bampis, Fanny Pascual LaMI, University of Evry, France WINE.
Greedy Algorithms Basic idea Connection to dynamic programming Proof Techniques.
Merge Sort 4/15/2017 6:09 PM The Greedy Method The Greedy Method.
Characterizing the Distribution of Low- Makespan Schedules in the Job Shop Scheduling Problem Matthew J. Streeter Stephen F. Smith Carnegie Mellon University.
Complexity 16-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Non-Approximability.
1 IOE/MFG 543 Chapter 3: Single machine models (Sections 3.1 and 3.2)
Linear Programming and Approximation
Krakow, Jan. 9, Outline: 1. Online bidding 2. Cow-path 3. Incremental medians (size approximation) 4. Incremental medians (cost approximation) 5.
Dean H. Lorenz, Danny Raz Operations Research Letter, Vol. 28, No
Load Balancing, Multicast routing, Price of Anarchy and Strong Equilibrium Computational game theory Spring 2008 Michal Feldman.
Lecture 10 Matroid. Independent System Consider a finite set S and a collection C of subsets of S. (S,C) is called an independent system if i.e., it is.
9/3/10 A. Smith; based on slides by E. Demaine, C. Leiserson, S. Raskhodnikova, K. Wayne Guest lecturer: Martin Furer Algorithm Design and Analysis L ECTURE.
An equivalent version of the Caccetta-Häggkvist conjecture in an online load balancing problem Angelo Monti 1, Paolo Penna 2, Riccardo Silvestri 1 1 Università.
Comments on the relative and absolute fairness measures Joanna Józefowska *) Łukasz Józefowski *) Wiesław Kubiak **) *) Poznań University of Technology.
Approximation schemes Bin packing problem. Bin Packing problem Given n items with sizes a 1,…,a n  (0,1]. Find a packing in unit-sized bins that minimizes.
An Algorithm for the Coalitional Manipulation Problem under Maximin Michael Zuckerman, Omer Lev and Jeffrey S. Rosenschein (Simulations by Amitai Levy)
© 2009 IBM Corporation 1 Improving Consolidation of Virtual Machines with Risk-aware Bandwidth Oversubscription in Compute Clouds Amir Epstein Joint work.
Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science.
Mechanisms with Verification for Any Finite Domain Carmine Ventre Università degli Studi di Salerno.
Princeton University COS 423 Theory of Algorithms Spring 2001 Kevin Wayne Approximation Algorithms These lecture slides are adapted from CLRS.
Scheduling tasks from selfish multi-tasks agents Johanne Cohen, CNRS, LRI, Orsay Fanny Pascual, Université Pierre et Marie Curie (UPMC), LIP6, Paris.
1 Short Term Scheduling. 2  Planning horizon is short  Multiple unique jobs (tasks) with varying processing times and due dates  Multiple unique jobs.
Approximation Schemes Open Shop Problem. O||C max and Om||C max {J 1,..., J n } is set of jobs. {M 1,..., M m } is set of machines. J i : {O i1,..., O.
CSCI 256 Data Structures and Algorithm Analysis Lecture 6 Some slides by Kevin Wayne copyright 2005, Pearson Addison Wesley all rights reserved, and some.
Outline Introduction Minimizing the makespan Minimizing total flowtime
Multi-users, multi-organizations, multi-objectives : a single approach Denis Trystram (Grenoble University and INRIA) Collection of results of 3 papers.
Analysis of cooperation in multi-organization Scheduling Pierre-François Dutot (Grenoble University) Krzysztof Rzadca (Polish-Japanese school, Warsaw)
The full Steiner tree problem Theoretical Computer Science 306 (2003) C. L. Lu, C. Y. Tang, R. C. T. Lee Reporter: Cheng-Chung Li 2004/06/28.
Vasilis Syrgkanis Cornell University
1 JOB SEQUENCING WITH DEADLINES The problem is stated as below. There are n jobs to be processed on a machine. Each job i has a deadline d i ≥ 0 and profit.
Slides by Yong Liu1, Deep Medhi2, and Michał Pióro3
Feb 23, 2010 University of Liverpool Minimizing Total Busy Time in Parallel Scheduling with Application to Optical Networks Michele Flammini – University.
Lecture 9 CSE 331 June 18, The “real” end of Semester blues MondayTuesdayWednesdayThursdayFriday Project 331 HW Exam study Party! Write up a term.
Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science.
Approximation Algorithms for Scheduling
Greedy Algorithms – Chapter 5
Lecture 8: Dispatch Rules
Maximum Matching in the Online Batch-Arrival Model
Richard Anderson Lecture 23 Network Flow
Lecture 22 Network Flow, Part 2
Greedy Algorithms Basic idea Connection to dynamic programming
On Scheduling in Map-Reduce and Flow-Shops
Chapter 4 Greedy Algorithms
k-center Clustering under Perturbation Resilience
Lecture 21 CSE 331 Oct 21, 2016.
Lecture 21 CSE 331 Oct 20, 2017.
Merge Sort 11/28/2018 2:18 AM The Greedy Method The Greedy Method.
Merge Sort 11/28/2018 2:21 AM The Greedy Method The Greedy Method.
Merge Sort 11/28/2018 8:16 AM The Greedy Method The Greedy Method.
Linear Programming and Approximation
Lecture 11 Overview Self-Reducibility.
Lecture 11 Overview Self-Reducibility.
Merge Sort 1/17/2019 3:11 AM The Greedy Method The Greedy Method.
Selfish Load Balancing
NP-Completeness Reference: Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness by Garey and Johnson, W.H. Freeman and Company, 1979.
Lecture 21 Network Flow, Part 1
Merge Sort 5/2/2019 7:53 PM The Greedy Method The Greedy Method.
List Scheduling Given a list of jobs (each with a specified processing time), assign them to processors to minimize makespan (max load) In Graham’s notation:
Lecture 22 Network Flow, Part 2
Non-clairvoyant Precedence Constrained Scheduling
Presentation transcript:

Properties of SPT schedules Eric Angel, Evripidis Bampis, Fanny Pascual LaMI, university of Evry, France MISTA 2005

Outline  Definition of an SPT schedule  Quality of SPT schedules on these criteria: Min. Max ∑Cj: minimization of the maximum sum of completion times per machine. Fairness measure  Conclusion

Model Example: Cj = completion time of task j. (e.g. C 3 =4) Main quality criteria: Makespan -> (P||C max ) Sum of completion times ( ∑ Cj ) -> (P|| ∑ Cj ) P1 P2 P3 n tasks m machines time

SPT schedules SPT= Shortest Processing Time first Smith’s rule: SPT greedy –Sort tasks in order of increasing lengths. –Schedule them as soon as a machine is available. Algo which minimizes ∑Cj. Class of the schedules which minimize ∑Cj : [Bruno et al]: Algorithms for minimizing mean flow time

A schedule minimizes ∑Cj iff it is an SPT schedule SPT schedules [Bruno et al]: notion of rank Rank 1: Rank 2: Rank 3: The tasks of rank i are counted i times in the ∑Cj : ∑Cj= C 1 + C 4 + C 7 + C 2 + C 5 + C 8 + … = l(1) + ( l(1) + l(4) ) + ( l(1) + l(4) + l(7) ) + … = 3 l(1) + 2 l(4) + l(7) + … machine 1

Outline  Definition of an SPT schedule  Quality of SPT schedules on these criteria: Min. Max ∑Cj: minimization of the maximum sum of completion times per machine. –Example –NP-complete problem –Analysis of SPT greedy Fairness measure  Conclusion

Minimization of Max ∑Cj Pb = Minimization of Max ∑ Cj To minimize Max ∑Cj  To minimize ∑Cj Max ∑Cj = 7 Max ∑Cj = 6 ∑Cj = 10 ∑Cj = 11 NP-complete problem. i  {1,…,m}j on Pi P1 P P1

To minimize Max ∑Cj is an NP-complete problem We reduce the partition problem into a Min. Max ∑Cj problem. –Partition: Let C={ x1, x2,..., xn } be a set of numbers. Does there exist a partition (A,B) of C such that ∑ x  A x = ∑ x  B x ? –Min. Max ∑Cj: Let n tasks and m machines, and let k be a number. Does there exist a schedule such that Max ∑Cj= k ?

Min Max ∑Cj is NP-complete Transformation: –Partition: C={ x1, x2,..., xn } –Min. Max ∑Cj: k= ½ Min ∑Cj ;2 machines;2n tasks Example : C={ x1, x2, x3 } Tasks = P1 P2 3 x1 3 x1 3 x1 + 2 x2 3 x1 + 2 x3 + 3 x1 + 2 ≠ce contrib ∑Cj = 3 x1 + 2 x2 3 x1 3 x1 3 x1 + 2,,,,, 3 x1 + 2 x3 + x1 x2x3 + x1+ x2 + x3  x1 + x2 = x3 Claim: Solution of (Min. Max ∑Cj)  ∑Cj = ∑Cj = k = ½ Min ∑Cj P1P2

Min Max ∑Cj is NP-complete tasks ≠ce length rank ≠ce contrib ∑Cj transformation: –Partition: C={ x1, x2,..., xn }. –Min. Max ∑Cj: k= ½ Min ∑Cj ; 2 machines; 2n tasks n - 2 n n - 1

Min. Max ∑Cj : analysis of SPT greedy Theorem 1 : –The approx. ratio of SPT greedy is ≤ 3 – 3/m + 1/m 2. Theorem 2 : –The approx. ratio of SPT greedy is ≥ 2 – 2/(m 2 + m).

Min. Max ∑Cj : analysis of SPT greedy Theorem 2 : –The approx. ratio of SPT greedy is ≥ 2 – 2/(m 2 + m). ( example: for m=3, ratio ≥ 11/6 ) Proof: –m(m-1) tasks of length 1 –A task of length B= m(m+1)/2 –Example for m=3: Max ∑Cj = 11 Max ∑Cj = 6

 Definition of an SPT schedule  Quality of SPT schedules on these criteria: Min. Max ∑Cj. Fairness measure.  Conclusion Outline

Fairness measure [Kumar, Kleinberg]: Fairness Measures For Ressources Allocation (FOCS 2000) Definition: global approx ratio of a schedule S: –Max. ratio between the completion time of the i th task of S, and the min. completion time of the i th task of any other schedule. –I = instance; X = (sorted) vector of completion times –C(X) = min  s.t. X   Y  Y= feasible schedule of I –C*(I) = min C(X) s.t. X = feasible schedule of I –C*= max C*(I) 1 4 Vector X = (1, 3, 4) 2

Fairness measure Example: Vector X = (1, 2, 4) Possible vectors: X + (1, 2, 5) (1, 3, 3) (1, 3, 5) (2, 3, 3) (2, 3, 4) (1, 3, 6) (1, 4, 6) (2, 3, 6) (2, 5, 6) (3, 4, 6) (3, 5, 6) Min = (1, 2, 3) C (X) = 4/3 C* (I) = 4/3 I={,, }

Fairness measure Theorem 1: –C(X SPTgreedy ) ≤ 2 – 1/m. ( example: for m=2, C(X SPTgreedy ) ≤ 3 / 2 ) Theorem 2: –C* = 3/2 when m=2. Proof of theorem 2: Vector X = (1, 1, 3) C (I) = C* = 3/2

Conclusion – Future work Conclusion –Minimization ofMax ∑Cj = NP-complete pb. –SPT greedy between 2 – 2/(m 2 + m) and 3 – 3/m + 1/m 2 for Min. Max ∑Cj. –Good fairness measure for SPT greedy. Future work –A better bound for SPT greedy for Min. Max ∑Cj. –Study of fairness measure on other problems.