Peeling Close to the Orientability Threshold: Spatial Coupling in Hashing-Based Data Structures
January 28, 2020 Β· Declared Dead Β· π ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Stefan Walzer
arXiv ID
2001.10500
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
26
Venue
ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
In multiple-choice data structures each element $x$ in a set $S$ of $m$ keys is associated with a random set $e(x) \subseteq [n]$ of buckets with capacity $\ell \geq 1$ by hash functions. This setting is captured by the hypergraph $H = ([n],\{e(x) \mid x \in S\})$. Accomodating each key in an associated bucket amounts to finding an $\ell$-orientation of $H$ assigning to each hyperedge an incident vertex such that each vertex is assigned at most $\ell$ hyperedges. If each subhypergraph of $H$ has minimum degree at most $\ell$, then an $\ell$-orientation can be found greedily and $H$ is called $\ell$-peelable. Peelability has a central role in invertible Bloom lookup tables and can speed up the construction of retrieval data structures, perfect hash functions and cuckoo hash tables. Many hypergraphs exhibit sharp density thresholds with respect to $\ell$-orientability and $\ell$-peelability, i.e. as the density $c = \frac{m}{n}$ grows past a critical value, the probability of these properties drops from almost $1$ to almost $0$. In fully random $k$-uniform hypergraphs the thresholds $c_{k,\ell}^*$ for $\ell$-orientability significantly exceed the thresholds for $\ell$-peelability. In this paper, for every $k \geq 2$ and $\ell \geq 1$ with $(k,\ell) \neq (2,1)$ and every $z > 0$, we construct a new family of random $k$-uniform hypergraphs with i.i.d. random hyperedges such that both the $\ell$-peelability and the $\ell$-orientability thresholds approach $c_{k,\ell}^*$ as $z \rightarrow \infty$. We exploit the phenomenon of threshold saturation via spatial coupling discovered in the context of low-density parity-check codes. Once the connection to data structures is in plain sight, a framework by Kudekar, Richardson and Urbanke (2015) does the heavy lifting in our proof.
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