1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root1 Stochastic Steiner Tree without a Root Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Iterative Rounding and Iterative Relaxation
Advertisements

The Primal-Dual Method: Steiner Forest TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AA A A AA A A A AA A A.
TAM 5.1.'05Boosted Sampling1 Boosted Sampling: Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Problems Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta R. RaviAmitabh.
Chapter 4 Partition I. Covering and Dominating.
Triangle partition problem Jian Li Sep,2005.  Proposed by Redstar in Algorithm board in Fudan BBS.  Motivated by some network design strategy.
Lower Bound for Sparse Euclidean Spanners Presented by- Deepak Kumar Gupta(Y6154), Nandan Kumar Dubey(Y6279), Vishal Agrawal(Y6541)
Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science for Some.
Primal-Dual Algorithms for Connected Facility Location Chaitanya SwamyAmit Kumar Cornell University.
Junction Trees And Belief Propagation. Junction Trees: Motivation What if we want to compute all marginals, not just one? Doing variable elimination for.
Approximation Algorithms Chapter 5: k-center. Overview n Main issue: Parametric pruning –Technique for approximation algorithms n 2-approx. algorithm.
Ion Mandoiu (Georgia Tech) Alex Zelikovsky (Georgia State) ISMP 2000 Practical Approximation Algorithms for Zero- and Bounded-Skew Trees.
Combinatorial Algorithms
24 Feb 04Boosted Sampling1 Boosted Sampling: Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Problems Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta R. Ravi Amitabh Sinha.
1 Online and Stochastic Survivable Network Design Ravishankar Krishnaswamy Carnegie Mellon University joint work with Anupam Gupta and R. Ravi.
Approximation Algorithms for Non-Uniform Buy-at-Bulk Network Design Problems Mohammad R. Salavatipour Department of Computing Science University of Alberta.
Approximation Algorithms: Combinatorial Approaches Lecture 13: March 2.
1 Approximation Algorithms for Demand- Robust and Stochastic Min-Cut Problems Vineet Goyal Carnegie Mellon University Based on, [Golovin, G, Ravi] (STACS’06)
A Constant Factor Approximation Algorithm for the Multicommodity Rent-or-Buy Problem Amit Kumar Anupam Gupta Tim Roughgarden Bell Labs CMU Cornell joint.
14 Oct 03Cost sharing & Approximation1 Group strategy proof mechanisms via primal-dual algorithms (Cost Sharing) Martin PálÉva Tardos.
Single Sink Edge Installation Kunal Talwar UC Berkeley.
A general approximation technique for constrained forest problems Michael X. Goemans & David P. Williamson Presented by: Yonatan Elhanani & Yuval Cohen.
Robust Network Design with Exponential Scenarios By: Rohit Khandekar Guy Kortsarz Vahab Mirrokni Mohammad Salavatipour.
Increasing graph connectivity from 1 to 2 Guy Kortsarz Joint work with Even and Nutov.
Greedy Algorithms Reading Material: Chapter 8 (Except Section 8.5)
Dept. of Computer Science Distributed Computing Group Asymptotically Optimal Mobile Ad-Hoc Routing Fabian Kuhn Roger Wattenhofer Aaron Zollinger.
Multicommodity Rent or Buy: Approximation Via Cost Sharing Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta Amit Kumar Tim Roughgarden.
Near-Optimal Network Design with Selfish Agents By Elliot Anshelevich, Anirban Dasgupta, Eva Tardos, Tom Wexler STOC’03 Presented by Mustafa Suleyman CIFTCI.
Network Design with Concave Cost Functions Kamesh Munagala, Stanford University.
Primal-Dual Algorithms for Connected Facility Location Chaitanya SwamyAmit Kumar Cornell University.
Greedy Algorithms Like dynamic programming algorithms, greedy algorithms are usually designed to solve optimization problems Unlike dynamic programming.
A General Approach to Online Network Optimization Problems Seffi Naor Computer Science Dept. Technion Haifa, Israel Joint work: Noga Alon, Yossi Azar,
Packing Element-Disjoint Steiner Trees Mohammad R. Salavatipour Department of Computing Science University of Alberta Joint with Joseph Cheriyan Department.
Minimum Spanning Trees. Subgraph A graph G is a subgraph of graph H if –The vertices of G are a subset of the vertices of H, and –The edges of G are a.
Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Combinatorial Optimization R. Ravi Carnegie Mellon University Joint work with: Kedar Dhamdhere, CMU Kedar Dhamdhere,
Minimal Spanning Trees What is a minimal spanning tree (MST) and how to find one.
ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root1 Stochastic Steiner Trees without a Root Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta.
Nirmalya Roy School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Washington State University Cpt S 223 – Advanced Data Structures Graph Algorithms: Minimum.
Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Combinatorial Optimization Part I: Multistage problems Anupam Gupta Carnegie Mellon University.
Algorithms for Network Optimization Problems This handout: Minimum Spanning Tree Problem Approximation Algorithms Traveling Salesman Problem.
Network Design for Information Networks Chaitanya Swamy Caltech and U. Waterloo Ara HayrapetyanÉva Tardos Cornell University.
MST Many of the slides are from Prof. Plaisted’s resources at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Advanced Algorithm Design and Analysis (Lecture 13) SW5 fall 2004 Simonas Šaltenis E1-215b
Topics in Algorithms 2005 Constructing Well-Connected Networks via Linear Programming and Primal Dual Algorithms Ramesh Hariharan.
UNC Chapel Hill Lin/Foskey/Manocha Minimum Spanning Trees Problem: Connect a set of nodes by a network of minimal total length Some applications: –Communication.
GRAPH SPANNERS by S.Nithya. Spanner Definition- Informal A geometric spanner network for a set of points is a graph G in which each pair of vertices is.
Primal-Dual Algorithms for Connected Facility Location Chaitanya SwamyAmit Kumar Cornell University.
Stochastic Multicast with Network Coding Ajay Gopinathan, Zongpeng Li Department of Computer Science University of Calgary ICDCS 2009, June , Montreal.
Projects Network Theory VLSI PSM 1. Network 1. Steiner trees
Approximate Inference: Decomposition Methods with Applications to Computer Vision Kyomin Jung ( KAIST ) Joint work with Pushmeet Kohli (Microsoft Research)
Variations of the Prize- Collecting Steiner Tree Problem Olena Chapovska and Abraham P. Punnen Networks 2006 Reporter: Cheng-Chung Li 2006/08/28.
Spanning tree Lecture 4.
Improved Approximation Algorithms for Directed Steiner Forest Moran Feldman Technion Joint work with: Guy Kortsarz,Rutgers University Camden Zeev Nutov,The.
MA/CSSE 473 Day 34 MST details: Kruskal's Algorithm Prim's Algorithm.
12 Sep 03Martin Pál: Cost sharing & Approx1 Cost Sharing and Approximation Martin Pál joint work with Éva Tardos A-exam.
Approximating Buy-at-Bulk and Shallow-Light k-Steiner Trees Mohammad T. Hajiaghayi (CMU) Guy Kortsarz (Rutgers) Mohammad R. Salavatipour (U. Alberta) Presented.
NOTE: To change the image on this slide, select the picture and delete it. Then click the Pictures icon in the placeholder to insert your own image. Fast.
Approximation Algorithms by bounding the OPT Instructor Neelima Gupta
CSCI-256 Data Structures & Algorithm Analysis Lecture Note: Some slides by Kevin Wayne. Copyright © 2005 Pearson-Addison Wesley. All rights reserved. 11.
Approximation Algorithms based on linear programming.
Introduction Wireless Ad-Hoc Network  Set of transceivers communicating by radio.
Confidential & Proprietary – All Rights Reserved Internal Distribution, October Quality of Service in Multimedia Distribution G. Calinescu (Illinois.
Steiner trees: Approximation Algorithms
The minimum cost flow problem
Maximum Matching in the Online Batch-Arrival Model
Chapter 5. Optimal Matchings
James B. Orlin Presented by Tal Kaminker
Introduction Wireless Ad-Hoc Network
Minimum Spanning Tree Algorithms
Zero-Skew Trees Zero-Skew Tree: rooted tree in which all root-to-leaf paths have the same length Used in VLSI clock routing & network multicasting.
Minimum Spanning Trees
Presentation transcript:

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root1 Stochastic Steiner Tree without a Root Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root2 Steiner Tree Input: graph G, weights c e on edges, set of terminals g = {t 1, t 2, …, t n } Solution: a network connecting all terminals. Goal: minimize cost of the network built. Note: optimal network will be a tree.

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root3 Stochastic Steiner tree What if the terminals are not known beforehand? Installing edges in advance reduces cost – but planning must be done obliviously. We may not be able to correctly connect all demands – but hopefully we will be allowed to fix things later by buying extra edges. ? ? ? ? ? ?

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root4 The model Two stage stochastic model with recourse: On Monday, edges are cheap, but we do not know the set of terminals. We can buy edges. On Tuesday, set g of terminals materializes. We must buy edges to connect up g. Edges are σ times more expensive. (σ == inflation factor). drawn from a known distribution π

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root5 The model Two stage stochastic model with recourse: Find F 1  Edges and F 2 : 2 Users  2 Edges to minimizecost(F 1 ) + σ E π(g) [cost(F 2 (g))] subject to connected(g, F 1  F 2 (g)) for all sets g  Users Want compact representation of F 2 by an algorithm

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root6 First stage not connected subgraph Pr[ ] = Pr[ ] = ½ σ > 2 Two distant groups Two nearby groups

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root7 The Rent or Buy problem (1) Input: graph G, weights c e on edges, set of demand pairs D, a constant M≥1 Solution: a set of paths, one for each (s i,t i ) pair. Goal: minimize cost of the network built.

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root8 The Rent or Buy problem (2) Rent or buy: Must rent or buy each edge. rent: pay c e for each path using edge e buy: pay M  c e Goal: minimize rental+buying costs. Steiner forest: pay c e for every edge used

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root9 Rent or Buy as Stochastic Steiner Let g i ={s i,t i } π(g i ) = 1/n σ = M/n install e in first stage  buy e install e in second stage  rent e Stochastic Steiner = generalized RoB Each group g i has tree T i (may have exponentially many groups)

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root10 The Algorithm 1. Boosted Sampling: Draw σ groups of clients g 1,g 2,…,g σ indep. from the distribution π. 2.Build a Steiner forest F 1 on {g 1,g 2,…,g σ } using an  -approx algorithm. 3. When actual group g of terminals appears, build a tree spanning g in G/F 1.

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root11 Bounding the cost Expected first stage cost is small: Using  -approx, can get    OPT Theorem: Expected cost of bought edges is    OPT. Lemma: There is a forest F on sampled groups with E[cost(F)]  OPT. e installed in first stage OPT: Pr[e is in F] = 1 e not in first stage OPT: Pr[e is in F] ≤ σ Pr[e is in some T i ]

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root12 Bounding the second stage cost Unselected groups pay their rental cost Selected groups contribute towards buying its tree pays rent pays buy Plan: Bound second stage cost by the first stage cost: Expected second stage( )   Expected share( ) pays rent pays buy

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root13 Need a cost sharing algorithm Input: Set of demand groups S Output: Steiner forest F S on S cost share ξ(S,g) of each group g  S ξ({ }, ) = 4 ξ({ }, ) = 5 Set of demandsdemand group

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root14 Cost Sharing for Steiner Forest (P1) Good approximation: cost(F S )   St * (S) (P2) Cost shares do not overpay:  g  S ξ(S,g)  St * (S) (P3) Strictness: let S’ = S  {g} MST(g) in G/ F S   ξ(S’,g) Example: S = { } g = Rental of if F S bought     of share if added to S

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root15 Bounding second stage cost S’ = {g 1,g 2,…,g σ } and S = S’– { }. Imagine Pr[  S’ | S] = σ  π( ). E[rent( ) | S]  π( )  σ  MST( ) in G/F S E[buy( ) | S] = π( )  σ  ξ(S+, )      E[rent( )]    E[buy( )]  j  D E[rent(j)]    j  D E[buy(j)]   OPT

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root16 Computing shares using the AKR-GW algorithm ξ( ): Active terminals share cost of growth evenly.

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root17 AKR-GW is not enough 1+ε11 cost share( ) = 1/n +  rental( ) = 1 +  Solution: Force the algorithm to buy the middle edge - need to be careful not to pay too much Problem: cost shares do not pay enough!

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root18 Forcing AKR-GW buy more 1+ε11 Idea: Inflate the balls! Roughly speaking, multiply each radius by  > 1

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root19 Why should inflating work? layer: only is contributing layer: terminals other than contributing ξ( ) large ξ( ) small, can take shortcuts

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root20 The inflated AKR-GW 1.Run the standard AKR-GW algorithm on S 2.Note the time T j when each demand j frozen 3.Run the algorithm again, with new freezing rule: every demand j deactivated at time  T j for some  > 1 Freezing times

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root21 The inflated AKR-GW (2) Freezing times Original AKR-GW Inflated AKR-GW Freezing times

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root22 Easy facts Fact: Any time t: u and v in the same cluster in Original  u and v in the same cluster in Inflated  Inflated has at most as many clusters as Original Theorem: Forest constructed by Inflated AKR-GW has cost at most (  +1)  OPT. Pf: adapted from [GW].

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root23 Proving strictness Compare: Original(S+ )(cost shares) Inflated(S)(the forest we buy) Need to prove: MST( ) in G/ F S   ξ(S+, ) Lower bound on ξ(S+, ) : alone( ) Original(S+ ) must have connected terminals. Hence it contains a tree P spanning. Use it to bound MST( ).

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root24 Simplifying.. Let  be time when Original(S+ ) connects terminals. Terminate Original(S+ ) at time . In Inflated(S), freeze each term. j at time  min(T j,  ). Simpler graph H: Contract all edges that Inflated(S) bought. Call the new graph H. Run both Original(S+ ) and Inflated(S) on H. Note that Inflated(S) on H does not buy any edges!

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root25 Comparing Original(S+ ) & Inflated(S) Freezing times Original(S+ ) Inflated(S)

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root26 Proof idea Correspondence of other (i.e. non-red) layers: Layer l in Original(S+ )  Layer l’ in Inflated(S) |Tree| = |Alone| + |Other|   |Other| ≤ |Tree| (  -1)  |Tree| ≤   |Alone| +  |Waste| + |Duplicates| If we can prove: we are done. |Waste| ≤ |Alone| |Duplicates| ≤ |Alone| + |Other|

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root27 Bounding the Waste Claim: If a layer l contains t, then its corresponding inflated layer l’ also contains some t. Original(S+ ) Inflated(S) Pf: By picture. The only way of wasting a layer l is when the whole group lies inside l’.

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root28 Bounding the Waste (2) l l’

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root29 Bounding the Waste (3) l l’

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root30 Bounding the Duplicates # edges cut = #clusters –1 # intersections = 2 # edges # cuts < 2 #clusters |Alone| + |Other|+|Duplicates| < 2(|Alone| + |Other|)

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root31 Summing up |Tree| ≤ 4  /(  -2)  |Alone| Hence we have  +1 approximation algorithm with 4  /(  -2)-strict cost sharing. Setting  =4 we obtain a 5+8=13 approximation.

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root32 The End No need to know π explicitly (sampling oracle is enough) Is the ball inflation trick necessary? Derandomize the sampling algorithm (for π given explicitly). Get stronger strictness to allow multistage algo

1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root33 Theorem: Inflated AKR-GW is a 2  approximation. Pf: adopted from [GW]. ≤≥≠∫∏∑√∂∆≈∙  *** Useful Garbage ***