ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root1 Stochastic Steiner Trees without a Root Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
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.
Advertisements

Routing in Undirected Graphs with Constant Congestion Julia Chuzhoy Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago.
TAM 5.1.'05Boosted Sampling1 Boosted Sampling: Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Problems Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta R. RaviAmitabh.
Triangle partition problem Jian Li Sep,2005.  Proposed by Redstar in Algorithm board in Fudan BBS.  Motivated by some network design strategy.
Primal-Dual Algorithms for Connected Facility Location Chaitanya SwamyAmit Kumar Cornell University.
Approximation Algorithms Chapter 5: k-center. Overview n Main issue: Parametric pruning –Technique for approximation algorithms n 2-approx. algorithm.
Combinatorial Algorithms
Approximation Some Network Design Problems With Node Costs Guy Kortsarz Rutgers University, Camden, NJ Joint work with Zeev Nutov The Open University,
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 for Non-Uniform Buy-at-Bulk Network Design Problems Guy Kortsarz Rutgers University, Camden, NJ Joint work with C. Chekuri (Bell.
Algorithms for Max-min Optimization
Approximation Algorithms: Combinatorial Approaches Lecture 13: March 2.
Local Connection Game. Introduction Introduced in [FLMPS,PODC’03] A LCG is a game that models the creation of networks two competing issues: players want.
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.
Network Design Adam Meyerson Carnegie-Mellon University.
Perfect Graphs Lecture 23: Apr 17. Hard Optimization Problems Independent set Clique Colouring Clique cover Hard to approximate within a factor of coding.
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.
Greedy Algorithms Reading Material: Chapter 8 (Except Section 8.5)
An Approximation Algorithm for Requirement cut on graphs Viswanath Nagarajan Joint work with R. Ravi.
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.
On Stochastic Minimum Spanning Trees Kedar Dhamdhere Computer Science Department Joint work with: Mohit Singh, R. Ravi (IPCO 05)
1 On the Cost and Benefits of Procrastination: Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Combinatorial Optimization Problems (SODA 2004) Nicole Immorlica,
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.
Introduction Outline The Problem Domain Network Design Spanning Trees Steiner Trees Triangulation Technique Spanners Spanners Application Simple Greedy.
Near-Optimal Network Design With Selfish Agents Elliot Anshelevich, Anirban Dasgupta, Éva Tardos, Tom Wexler STOC’03, June 9–11, 2003, San Diego, California,
A General Approach to Online Network Optimization Problems Seffi Naor Computer Science Dept. Technion Haifa, Israel Joint work: Noga Alon, Yossi Azar,
Priority Models Sashka Davis University of California, San Diego June 1, 2003.
Packing Element-Disjoint Steiner Trees Mohammad R. Salavatipour Department of Computing Science University of Alberta Joint with Joseph Cheriyan Department.
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.
Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Combinatorial Optimization Part I: Multistage problems Anupam Gupta Carnegie Mellon University.
Theory of Computing Lecture 10 MAS 714 Hartmut Klauck.
V. V. Vazirani. Approximation Algorithms Chapters 3 & 22
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.
Nattee Niparnan. Easy & Hard Problem What is “difficulty” of problem? Difficult for computer scientist to derive algorithm for the problem? Difficult.
Adaptive CSMA under the SINR Model: Fast convergence using the Bethe Approximation Krishna Jagannathan IIT Madras (Joint work with) Peruru Subrahmanya.
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.
Primal-Dual Algorithms for Connected Facility Location Chaitanya SwamyAmit Kumar Cornell University.
Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Optimization Chaitanya Swamy Caltech and U. Waterloo Joint work with David Shmoys Cornell University.
Stochastic Multicast with Network Coding Ajay Gopinathan, Zongpeng Li Department of Computer Science University of Calgary ICDCS 2009, June , Montreal.
Minimal Spanning Tree Problems in What is a minimal spanning tree An MST is a tree (set of edges) that connects all nodes in a graph, using.
Approximate Inference: Decomposition Methods with Applications to Computer Vision Kyomin Jung ( KAIST ) Joint work with Pushmeet Kohli (Microsoft Research)
1 Mar 05Stochastic Steiner without a Root1 Stochastic Steiner Tree without a Root Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta.
Chapter 2. Optimal Trees and Paths Combinatorial Optimization
Variations of the Prize- Collecting Steiner Tree Problem Olena Chapovska and Abraham P. Punnen Networks 2006 Reporter: Cheng-Chung Li 2006/08/28.
Improved Approximation Algorithms for Directed Steiner Forest Moran Feldman Technion Joint work with: Guy Kortsarz,Rutgers University Camden Zeev Nutov,The.
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 based on linear programming.
Sketching complexity of graph cuts Alexandr Andoni joint work with: Robi Krauthgamer, David Woodruff.
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
Information Complexity Lower Bounds
Maximum Matching in the Online Batch-Arrival Model
Chapter 5. Optimal Matchings
James B. Orlin Presented by Tal Kaminker
Graph Partitioning Problems
Introduction Wireless Ad-Hoc Network
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.
Presentation transcript:

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root1 Stochastic Steiner Trees without a Root Martin Pál Joint work with Anupam Gupta

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root2 Stochastic Optimization Decision making under uncertainity Logistics/inventory management/supply chain Stock market Network design/capacity planning Uncertainity modeled by probability Making decisions to optimize overall expected cost (profit)

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root3 Outline Two-stage stochastic model with recourse Stochastic problems are hard to solve: Stochastic path vs. Multicommodity Rent or Buy Learning the distribution vs. solving the problem: how many samples are needed? Solution Approach: Boosted Sampling

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root4 Network Design Problem 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 Steiner tree.

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root5 Stochastic Network Design What if the terminals are not known beforehand? Waiting until demand points become known is costly – building links on short notice is expensive. Pre-install some links at a discount to reduce cost – must decide before knowing demands. ? ? ? ? ? ?

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root6 Two-stage model w. recourse On Monday, edges are cheap, but we do not know the set of terminals. We can buy some edges at low price. On Tuesday, set g of terminals materializes. We must buy edges to connect up g. Edges are now more expensive. drawn from a known distribution π

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root7 The model Two stage stochastic model with recourse: Find F 1  Edges and F 2 : 2 Users  2 Edges to minimizecost 1 (F 1 ) + E π(g) [cost 2 (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 cost(F 1 ) + σ E π(g) [cost(F 2 (g))] Assumption: cost 2 (X) = σ cost 1 (X) inflation factor

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root8 Representing π Explicit list of scenarios: (g 1, π(g 1 )), (g 2, π(g 2 )),…, (g k, π(g k )) Oracle model: sampling oracle generates independent samples from π Theorem [CCP05]: Any distribution can be approximated by an explicit list of size poly(|G|, σ, 1/  ) using sampling.

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root9 The Rent or Buy problem Input: weighted graph G 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.

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root10 The Rent or Buy problem Rent or buy: Must rent or buy each edge. rent: pay 1 per unit length buy: pay M per unit length Goal: minimize rental+buying costs. Steiner forest: pay 1 for every edge used

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root11 Rent or Buy = Stochastic Path 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)

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root12 First stage not connected subgraph Pr[ ] = Pr[ ] = ½ σ > 2 Two distant groups Two nearby groups

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root13 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.

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root14 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 ]

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root15 Bounding the second stage cost Unselected groups pay their second stage cost Selected groups share first stage costs pays 1.st. pays 2.st pays 1.st Plan: Bound second stage cost by the first stage cost: Expected second stage( )   Expected share( ) pays 2.st pays 1.st

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root16 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

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root17 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

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root18 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

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root19 Computing shares using the AKR-GW algorithm ξ( ): Active terminals share cost of growth evenly.

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root20 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!

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root21 Forcing AKR-GW buy more 1+ε11 Idea: Inflate the balls! Roughly speaking, multiply each radius by  > 1

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root22 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

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root23 The inflated AKR-GW (2) Freezing times Original AKR-GW Inflated AKR-GW Freezing times

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root24 Why should inflating work? layer: only is contributing layer: terminals other than contributing ξ( ) large ξ( ) small, can take shortcuts

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root25 The End Boosted sampling algorithm suggests that σ samples carry enough information about the distribution π. How general is this phenomenon? With non-uniform cost inflation, even Stochastic Path hard to approximate better than log 2 n [HK03]. Stochastic spanning tree O(log n) approximable [DRS05]. Expanding toolbox: Chance constraints, different objectives.. Stochastic processes with many decision stages Connections to machine learning, online algorithms

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root26 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].

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root27 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( ).

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root28 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!

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root29 Comparing Original(S+ ) & Inflated(S) Freezing times Original(S+ ) Inflated(S)

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root30 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|

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root31 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’.

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root32 Bounding the Waste (2) l l’

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root33 Bounding the Waste (3) l l’

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root34 Bounding the Duplicates # edges cut = #clusters –1 # intersections = 2 # edges # cuts < 2 #clusters |Alone| + |Other|+|Duplicates| < 2(|Alone| + |Other|)

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root35 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.

ICALP'05Stochastic Steiner without a Root36 Theorem: Inflated AKR-GW is a  +1 approximation. Pf: adopted from [GW]. ≤≥≠∫∏∑√∂∆≈∙  *** Useful Garbage ***