BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Joan Boyar

Joan Boyar appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Data Structures and AlgorithmsComputational ComplexityDistributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing

Catalog footprint

What is connected

16works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

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

Published work

16 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
preprint2016arXiv

Batch Coloring of Graphs

In graph coloring problems, the goal is to assign a positive integer color to each vertex of an input graph such that adjacent vertices do not receive the same color assignment. For classic graph coloring, the goal is to minimize the maximum color used, and for the sum coloring problem, the goal is to minimize the sum of colors assigned to all input vertices. In the offline variant, the entire graph is presented at once, and in online problems, one vertex is presented for coloring at each time, and the only information is the identity of its neighbors among previously known vertices. In batched graph coloring, vertices are presented in k batches, for a fixed integer k > 1, such that the vertices of a batch are presented as a set, and must be colored before the vertices of the next batch are presented. This last model is an intermediate model, which bridges between the two extreme scenarios of the online and offline models. We provide several results, including a general result for sum coloring and results for the classic graph coloring problem on restricted graph classes: We show tight bounds for any graph class containing trees as a subclass (e.g., forests, bipartite graphs, planar graphs, and perfect graphs), and a surprising result for interval graphs and k = 2, where the value of the (strict and asymptotic) competitive ratio depends on whether the graph is presented with its interval representation or not.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

On the List Update Problem with Advice

We study the online list update problem under the advice model of computation. Under this model, an online algorithm receives partial information about the unknown parts of the input in the form of some bits of advice generated by a benevolent offline oracle. We show that advice of linear size is required and sufficient for a deterministic algorithm to achieve an optimal solution or even a competitive ratio better than $15/14$. On the other hand, we show that surprisingly two bits of advice are sufficient to break the lower bound of $2$ on the competitive ratio of deterministic online algorithms and achieve a deterministic algorithm with a competitive ratio of $5/3$. In this upper-bound argument, the bits of advice determine the algorithm with smaller cost among three classical online algorithms, TIMESTAMP and two members of the MTF2 family of algorithms. We also show that MTF2 algorithms are $2.5$-competitive.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

The Advice Complexity of a Class of Hard Online Problems

The advice complexity of an online problem is a measure of how much knowledge of the future an online algorithm needs in order to achieve a certain competitive ratio. Using advice complexity, we define the first online complexity class, AOC. The class includes independent set, vertex cover, dominating set, and several others as complete problems. AOC-complete problems are hard, since a single wrong answer by the online algorithm can have devastating consequences. For each of these problems, we show that $\log\left(1+(c-1)^{c-1}/c^{c}\right)n=Θ(n/c)$ bits of advice are necessary and sufficient (up to an additive term of $O(\log n)$) to achieve a competitive ratio of $c$. The results are obtained by introducing a new string guessing problem related to those of Emek et al. (TCS 2011) and Böckenhauer et al. (TCS 2014). It turns out that this gives a powerful but easy-to-use method for providing both upper and lower bounds on the advice complexity of an entire class of online problems, the AOC-complete problems. Previous results of Halldórsson et al. (TCS 2002) on online independent set, in a related model, imply that the advice complexity of the problem is $Θ(n/c)$. Our results improve on this by providing an exact formula for the higher-order term. For online disjoint path allocation, Böckenhauer et al. (ISAAC 2009) gave a lower bound of $Ω(n/c)$ and an upper bound of $O((n\log c)/c)$ on the advice complexity. We improve on the upper bound by a factor of $\log c$. For the remaining problems, no bounds on their advice complexity were previously known.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Constructive Relationships Between Algebraic Thickness and Normality

We study the relationship between two measures of Boolean functions; \emph{algebraic thickness} and \emph{normality}. For a function $f$, the algebraic thickness is a variant of the \emph{sparsity}, the number of nonzero coefficients in the unique GF(2) polynomial representing $f$, and the normality is the largest dimension of an affine subspace on which $f$ is constant. We show that for $0 < ε<2$, any function with algebraic thickness $n^{3-ε}$ is constant on some affine subspace of dimension $Ω\left(n^{\fracε{2}}\right)$. Furthermore, we give an algorithm for finding such a subspace. We show that this is at most a factor of $Θ(\sqrt{n})$ from the best guaranteed, and when restricted to the technique used, is at most a factor of $Θ(\sqrt{\log n})$ from the best guaranteed. We also show that a concrete function, majority, has algebraic thickness $Ω\left(2^{n^{1/6}}\right)$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Cancellation-Free Circuits in Unbounded and Bounded Depth

We study the notion of "cancellation-free" circuits. This is a restriction of linear Boolean circuits (XOR circuits), but can be considered as being equivalent to previously studied models of computation. The notion was coined by Boyar and Peralta in a study of heuristics for a particular circuit minimization problem. They asked how large a gap there can be between the smallest cancellation-free circuit and the smallest linear circuit. We show that the difference can be a factor $Ω(n/\log^{2}n)$. This improves on a recent result by Sergeev and Gashkov who have studied a similar problem. Furthermore, our proof holds for circuits of constant depth. We also study the complexity of computing the Sierpinski matrix using cancellation-free circuits and give a tight $Ω(n\log n)$ lower bound.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Online Bin Packing with Advice

We consider the online bin packing problem under the advice complexity model where the 'online constraint' is relaxed and an algorithm receives partial information about the future requests. We provide tight upper and lower bounds for the amount of advice an algorithm needs to achieve an optimal packing. We also introduce an algorithm that, when provided with log n + o(log n) bits of advice, achieves a competitive ratio of 3/2 for the general problem. This algorithm is simple and is expected to find real-world applications. We introduce another algorithm that receives 2n + o(n) bits of advice and achieves a competitive ratio of 4/3 + ε. Finally, we provide a lower bound argument that implies that advice of linear size is required for an algorithm to achieve a competitive ratio better than 9/8.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Relative Interval Analysis of Paging Algorithms on Access Graphs

Access graphs, which have been used previously in connection with competitive analysis and relative worst order analysis to model locality of reference in paging, are considered in connection with relative interval analysis. The algorithms LRU, FIFO, FWF, and FAR are compared using the path, star, and cycle access graphs. In this model, some of the expected results are obtained. However, although LRU is found to be strictly better than FIFO on paths, it has worse performance on stars, cycles, and complete graphs, in this model. We solve an open question from [Dorrigiv, Lopez-Ortiz, Munro, 2009], obtaining tight bounds on the relationship between LRU and FIFO with relative interval analysis.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

The Frequent Items Problem in Online Streaming under Various Performance Measures

In this paper, we strengthen the competitive analysis results obtained for a fundamental online streaming problem, the Frequent Items Problem. Additionally, we contribute with a more detailed analysis of this problem, using alternative performance measures, supplementing the insight gained from competitive analysis. The results also contribute to the general study of performance measures for online algorithms. It has long been known that competitive analysis suffers from drawbacks in certain situations, and many alternative measures have been proposed. However, more systematic comparative studies of performance measures have been initiated recently, and we continue this work, using competitive analysis, relative interval analysis, and relative worst order analysis on the Frequent Items Problem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

A Comparison of Performance Measures for Online Algorithms

This paper provides a systematic study of several proposed measures for online algorithms in the context of a specific problem, namely, the two server problem on three colinear points. Even though the problem is simple, it encapsulates a core challenge in online algorithms which is to balance greediness and adaptability. We examine Competitive Analysis, the Max/Max Ratio, the Random Order Ratio, Bijective Analysis and Relative Worst Order Analysis, and determine how these measures compare the Greedy Algorithm, Double Coverage, and Lazy Double Coverage, commonly studied algorithms in the context of server problems. We find that by the Max/Max Ratio and Bijective Analysis, Greedy is the best of the three algorithms. Under the other measures, Double Coverage and Lazy Double Coverage are better, though Relative Worst Order Analysis indicates that Greedy is sometimes better. Only Bijective Analysis and Relative Worst Order Analysis indicate that Lazy Double Coverage is better than Double Coverage. Our results also provide the first proof of optimality of an algorithm under Relative Worst Order Analysis.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Access Graphs Results for LRU versus FIFO under Relative Worst Order Analysis

Access graphs, which have been used previously in connection with competitive analysis to model locality of reference in paging, are considered in connection with relative worst order analysis. In this model, FWF is shown to be strictly worse than both LRU and FIFO on any access graph. LRU is shown to be strictly better than FIFO on paths and cycles, but they are incomparable on some families of graphs which grow with the length of the sequences.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Cancellation-free circuits: An approach for proving superlinear lower bounds for linear Boolean operators

We continue to study the notion of cancellation-free linear circuits. We show that every matrix can be computed by a cancellation- free circuit, and almost all of these are at most a constant factor larger than the optimum linear circuit that computes the matrix. It appears to be easier to prove statements about the structure of cancellation-free linear circuits than for linear circuits in general. We prove two nontrivial superlinear lower bounds. We show that a cancellation-free linear circuit computing the $n\times n$ Sierpinski gasket matrix must use at least 1/2 n logn gates, and that this is tight. This supports a conjecture by Aaronson. Furthermore we show that a proof strategy for proving lower bounds on monotone circuits can be almost directly converted to prove lower bounds on cancellation-free linear circuits. We use this together with a result from extremal graph theory due to Andreev to prove a lower bound of Ω(n^(2- ε)) for infinitely many $n \times n$ matrices for every $ε> 0$ for. These lower bounds for concrete matrices are almost optimal since all matrices can be computed with $O(n^2/\log n)$ gates.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

A Comparison of Performance Measures via Online Search

Though competitive analysis has been a very useful performance measure for the quality of online algorithms, it is recognized that it sometimes fails to distinguish between algorithms of different quality in practice. A number of alternative measures have been proposed, but, with a few exceptions, these have generally been applied only to the online problem they were developed in connection with. Recently, a systematic study of performance measures for online algorithms was initiated [Boyar, Irani, Larsen: Eleventh International Algorithms and Data Structures Symposium 2009], first focusing on a simple server problem. We continue this work by studying a fundamentally different online problem, online search, and the Reservation Price Policies in particular. The purpose of this line of work is to learn more about the applicability of various performance measures in different situations and the properties that the different measures emphasize. We investigate the following analysis techniques: Competitive, Relative Worst Order, Bijective, Average, Relative Interval, Random Order, and Max/Max. In addition to drawing conclusions on this work, we also investigate the measures' sensitivity to integral vs. real-valued domains, and as a part of this work, generalize some of the known performance measures. Finally, we have established the first optimality proof for Relative Interval Analysis.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access