BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Joan Boyar

Joan Boyar contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Data Structures and AlgorithmsDistributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2025arXiv

Distributed Graph Algorithms with Predictions

We initiate the study of deterministic distributed graph algorithms with predictions in synchronous message passing systems. The process at each node in the graph is given a prediction, which is some extra information about the problem instance that may be incorrect. The processes may use the predictions to help them solve the problem. The overall goal is to develop algorithms that both work faster when predictions are good and do not work much worse than algorithms without predictions when predictions are bad. Concepts from the more general area of algorithms with predictions, such as error measures, consistency, robustness, and smoothness, are adapted to distributed graph algorithms with predictions. We consider algorithms with predictions for distributed graph problems, where each node is given a prediction for its output. We present a framework for evaluating distributed graph algorithms with predictions and methods for transforming existing algorithms without predictions to effectively use predictions. Our approach is illustrated by developing algorithms with predictions for the Maximal Independent Set problem. We also include a discussion of error measures and demonstrate how fine-tuning an error measure towards a particular problem can yield stronger results about the performance of algorithms for that problem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Advice Complexity of Adaptive Priority Algorithms

The priority model was introduced to capture "greedy-like" algorithms. Motivated by the success of advice complexity in the area of online algorithms, the fixed priority model was extended to include advice, and a reduction-based framework was developed for proving lower bounds on the amount of advice required to achieve certain approximation ratios in this rather powerful model. To capture most of the algorithms that are considered greedy-like, the even stronger model of adaptive priority algorithms is needed. We extend the adaptive priority model to include advice. We modify the reduction-based framework from the fixed priority case to work with the more powerful adaptive priority algorithms, simplifying the proof of correctness and strengthening all previous lower bounds by a factor of two in the process. We also present a purely combinatorial adaptive priority algorithm with advice for Minimum Vertex Cover on triangle-free graphs of maximum degree three. Our algorithm achieves optimality and uses at most 7n/22 bits of advice. No adaptive priority algorithm without advice can achieve optimality without advice, and we prove that an online algorithm with advice needs more than 7n/22 bits of advice to reach optimality. We show connections between exact algorithms and priority algorithms with advice. The branching in branch-and-reduce algorithms can be seen as trying all possible advice strings, and all priority algorithms with advice that achieve optimality define corresponding exact algorithms, priority exact algorithms. Lower bounds on advice-based adaptive algorithms imply lower bounds on running times of exact algorithms designed in this way.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Online Unit Profit Knapsack with Untrusted Predictions

A variant of the online knapsack problem is considered in the settings of trusted and untrusted predictions. In Unit Profit Knapsack, the items have unit profit, and it is easy to find an optimal solution offline: Pack as many of the smallest items as possible into the knapsack. For Online Unit Profit Knapsack, the competitive ratio is unbounded. In contrast, previous work on online algorithms with untrusted predictions generally studied problems where an online algorithm with a constant competitive ratio is known. The prediction, possibly obtained from a machine learning source, that our algorithm uses is the average size of those smallest items that fit in the knapsack. For the prediction error in this hard online problem, we use the ratio $r=\frac{a}{\hat{a}}$ where $a$ is the actual value for this average size and $\hat{a}$ is the prediction. The algorithm presented achieves a competitive ratio of $\frac{1}{2r}$ for $r\geq 1$ and $\frac{r}{2}$ for $r\leq 1$. Using an adversary technique, we show that this is optimal in some sense, giving a trade-off in the competitive ratio attainable for different values of $r$. Note that the result for accurate advice, $r=1$, is only $\frac{1}{2}$, but we show that no algorithm knowing the value $a$ can achieve a competitive ratio better than $\frac{e-1}{e}\approx 0.6321$ and present an algorithm with a matching upper bound. We also show that this latter algorithm attains a competitive ratio of $r\frac{e-1}{e}$ for $r \leq 1$ and $\frac{e-r}{e}$ for $1 \leq r < e$, and no algorithm can be better for both $r<1$ and $1\leq r<e$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Online Bin Covering with Advice

The bin covering problem asks for covering a maximum number of bins with an online sequence of $n$ items of different sizes in the range $(0,1]$; a bin is said to be covered if it receives items of total size at least 1. We study this problem in the advice setting and provide tight bounds for the size of advice required to achieve optimal solutions. Moreover, we show that any algorithm with advice of size $o(\log \log n)$ has a competitive ratio of at most 0.5. In other words, advice of size $o(\log \log n)$ is useless for improving the competitive ratio of 0.5, attainable by an online algorithm without advice. This result highlights a difference between the bin covering and the bin packing problems in the advice model: for the bin packing problem, there are several algorithms with advice of constant size that outperform online algorithms without advice. Furthermore, we show that advice of size $O(\log \log n)$ is sufficient to achieve a competitive ratio that is arbitrarily close to $0.53\bar{3}$ and hence strictly better than the best ratio $0.5$ attainable by purely online algorithms. The technicalities involved in introducing and analyzing this algorithm are quite different from the existing results for the bin packing problem and confirm the different nature of these two problems. Finally, we show that a linear number of bits of advice is necessary to achieve any competitive ratio better than 15/16 for the online bin covering problem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access