Improved Bounds for Fully Dynamic Matching via Ordered Ruzsa-Szemeredi Graphs
June 19, 2024 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
Sepehr Assadi, Sanjeev Khanna, Peter Kiss
arXiv ID
2406.13573
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
8
Venue
ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
In a very recent breakthrough, Behnezhad and Ghafari [FOCS'24] developed a novel fully dynamic randomized algorithm for maintaining a $(1-Ξ΅)$-approximation of maximum matching with amortized update time potentially much better than the trivial $O(n)$ update time. The runtime of the BG algorithm is parameterized via the following graph theoretical concept: * For any $n$, define $ORS(n)$ -- standing for Ordered RS Graph -- to be the largest number of edge-disjoint matchings $M_1,\ldots,M_t$ of size $Ξ(n)$ in an $n$-vertex graph such that for every $i \in [t]$, $M_i$ is an induced matching in the subgraph $M_{i} \cup M_{i+1} \cup \ldots \cup M_t$. Then, for any fixed $Ξ΅> 0$, the BG algorithm runs in \[ O\left( \sqrt{n^{1+O(Ξ΅)} \cdot ORS(n)} \right) \] amortized update time with high probability, even against an adaptive adversary. $ORS(n)$ is a close variant of a more well-known quantity regarding RS graphs (which require every matching to be induced regardless of the ordering). It is currently only known that $n^{o(1)} \leqslant ORS(n) \leqslant n^{1-o(1)}$, and closing this gap appears to be a notoriously challenging problem. In this work, we further strengthen the result of Behnezhad and Ghafari and push it to limit to obtain a randomized algorithm with amortized update time of \[ n^{o(1)} \cdot ORS(n) \] with high probability, even against an adaptive adversary. In the limit, i.e., if current lower bounds for $ORS(n) = n^{o(1)}$ are almost optimal, our algorithm achieves an $n^{o(1)}$ update time for $(1-Ξ΅)$-approximation of maximum matching, almost fully resolving this fundamental question. In its current stage also, this fully reduces the algorithmic problem of designing dynamic matching algorithms to a purely combinatorial problem of upper bounding $ORS(n)$ with no algorithmic considerations.
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