Online Algorithms for Multi-Level Aggregation
July 09, 2015 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Embedded Systems and Applications
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Marcin Bienkowski, Martin BΓΆhm, Jaroslaw Byrka, Marek Chrobak, Christoph DΓΌrr, LukΓ‘Ε‘ FolwarcznΓ½, Εukasz JeΕΌ, JiΕΓ Sgall, Nguyen Kim Thang, Pavel VeselΓ½
arXiv ID
1507.02378
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
36
Venue
Embedded Systems and Applications
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
In the Multi-Level Aggregation Problem (MLAP), requests arrive at the nodes of an edge-weighted tree T, and have to be served eventually. A service is defined as a subtree X of T that contains its root. This subtree X serves all requests that are pending in the nodes of X, and the cost of this service is equal to the total weight of X. Each request also incurs waiting cost between its arrival and service times. The objective is to minimize the total waiting cost of all requests plus the total cost of all service subtrees. MLAP is a generalization of some well-studied optimization problems; for example, for trees of depth 1, MLAP is equivalent to the TCP Acknowledgment Problem, while for trees of depth 2, it is equivalent to the Joint Replenishment Problem. Aggregation problem for trees of arbitrary depth arise in multicasting, sensor networks, communication in organization hierarchies, and in supply-chain management. The instances of MLAP associated with these applications are naturally online, in the sense that aggregation decisions need to be made without information about future requests. Constant-competitive online algorithms are known for MLAP with one or two levels. However, it has been open whether there exist constant competitive online algorithms for trees of depth more than 2. Addressing this open problem, we give the first constant competitive online algorithm for networks of arbitrary (fixed) number of levels. The competitive ratio is O(D^4 2^D), where D is the depth of T. The algorithm works for arbitrary waiting cost functions, including the variant with deadlines. We also show several additional lower and upper bound results for some special cases of MLAP, including the Single-Phase variant and the case when the tree is a path.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted