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

Saurabh Ray

Saurabh Ray contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computational GeometryData Structures and Algorithmsmath.COComputational Complexity

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
4topics
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

7 published item(s)

preprint2015arXiv

Tighter Estimates for epsilon-nets for Disks

The geometric hitting set problem is one of the basic geometric combinatorial optimization problems: given a set $P$ of points, and a set $\mathcal{D}$ of geometric objects in the plane, the goal is to compute a small-sized subset of $P$ that hits all objects in $\mathcal{D}$. In 1994, Bronniman and Goodrich made an important connection of this problem to the size of fundamental combinatorial structures called $ε$-nets, showing that small-sized $ε$-nets imply approximation algorithms with correspondingly small approximation ratios. Very recently, Agarwal and Pan showed that their scheme can be implemented in near-linear time for disks in the plane. Altogether this gives $O(1)$-factor approximation algorithms in $\tilde{O}(n)$ time for hitting sets for disks in the plane. This constant factor depends on the sizes of $ε$-nets for disks; unfortunately, the current state-of-the-art bounds are large -- at least $24/ε$ and most likely larger than $40/ε$. Thus the approximation factor of the Agarwal and Pan algorithm ends up being more than $40$. The best lower-bound is $2/ε$, which follows from the Pach-Woeginger construction for halfspaces in two dimensions. Thus there is a large gap between the best-known upper and lower bounds. Besides being of independent interest, finding precise bounds is important since this immediately implies an improved linear-time algorithm for the hitting-set problem. The main goal of this paper is to improve the upper-bound to $13.4/ε$ for disks in the plane. The proof is constructive, giving a simple algorithm that uses only Delaunay triangulations. We have implemented the algorithm, which is available as a public open-source module. Experimental results show that the sizes of $ε$-nets for a variety of data-sets is lower, around $9/ε$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Counting Triangulations and other Crossing-Free Structures Approximately

We consider the problem of counting straight-edge triangulations of a given set $P$ of $n$ points in the plane. Until very recently it was not known whether the exact number of triangulations of $P$ can be computed asymptotically faster than by enumerating all triangulations. We now know that the number of triangulations of $P$ can be computed in $O^{*}(2^{n})$ time, which is less than the lower bound of $Ω(2.43^{n})$ on the number of triangulations of any point set. In this paper we address the question of whether one can approximately count triangulations in sub-exponential time. We present an algorithm with sub-exponential running time and sub-exponential approximation ratio, that is, denoting by $Λ$ the output of our algorithm, and by $c^{n}$ the exact number of triangulations of $P$, for some positive constant $c$, we prove that $c^{n}\leqΛ\leq c^{n}\cdot 2^{o(n)}$. This is the first algorithm that in sub-exponential time computes a $(1+o(1))$-approximation of the base of the number of triangulations, more precisely, $c\leqΛ^{\frac{1}{n}}\leq(1 + o(1))c$. Our algorithm can be adapted to approximately count other crossing-free structures on $P$, keeping the quality of approximation and running time intact. In this paper we show how to do this for matchings and spanning trees.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

QPTAS for Geometric Set-Cover Problems via Optimal Separators

Weighted geometric set-cover problems arise naturally in several geometric and non-geometric settings (e.g. the breakthrough of Bansal-Pruhs (FOCS 2010) reduces a wide class of machine scheduling problems to weighted geometric set-cover). More than two decades of research has succeeded in settling the $(1+ε)$-approximability status for most geometric set-cover problems, except for four basic scenarios which are still lacking. One is that of weighted disks in the plane for which, after a series of papers, Varadarajan (STOC 2010) presented a clever \emph{quasi-sampling} technique, which together with improvements by Chan \etal~(SODA 2012), yielded a $O(1)$-approximation algorithm. Even for the unweighted case, a PTAS for a fundamental class of objects called pseudodisks (which includes disks, unit-height rectangles, translates of convex sets etc.) is currently unknown. Another fundamental case is weighted halfspaces in $\Re^3$, for which a PTAS is currently lacking. In this paper, we present a QPTAS for all of these remaining problems. Our results are based on the separator framework of Adamaszek-Wiese (FOCS 2013, SODA 2014), who recently obtained a QPTAS for weighted independent set of polygonal regions. This rules out the possibility that these problems are APX-hard, assuming $\textbf{NP} \nsubseteq \textbf{DTIME}(2^{polylog(n)})$. Together with the recent work of Chan-Grant (CGTA 2014), this settles the APX-hardness status for all natural geometric set-cover problems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

A Simple Sweep Line Algorithm for Counting Triangulations and Pseudo-triangulations

Let $P\subset\mathbb{R}^{2}$ be a set of $n$ points. In this paper we show two new algorithms, one to compute the number of triangulations of $P$, and one to compute the number of pseudo-triangulations of $P$. We show that our algorithms run in time $O^{*}(t(P))$ and $O^{*}(pt(P))$ respectively, where $t(P)$ and $pt(P)$ are the largest number of triangulation paths (T-paths) and pseudo-triangulations paths (PT-paths), respectively, that the algorithms encounter during their execution. Moreover, we show that $t(P) = O^{*}(9^{n})$, which is the first non-trivial bound on $t(P)$ to be known. While there already are algorithms that count triangulations in $O^{*}\left(2^n\right)$, and $O^{*}\left(3.1414^{n}\right)$, there are sets of points where the number of T-paths is $O(2^{n})$. In such cases the algorithm herein presented could potentially be faster. Furthermore, it is not clear whether the already-known algorithms can be modified to count pseudo-triangulations so that their running times remain $O^{*}(c^n)$, for some small constant $c\in\mathbb{R}$. Therefore, for counting pseudo-triangulations (and possibly other similar structures) our approach seems better.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Counting Triangulations and other Crossing-free Structures via Onion Layers

Let $P$ be a set of $n$ points in the plane. A crossing-free structure on $P$ is a plane graph with vertex set $P$. Examples of crossing-free structures include triangulations of $P$, spanning cycles of $P$, also known as polygonalizations of $P$, among others. In this paper we develop a general technique for computing the number of crossing-free structures of an input set $P$. We apply the technique to obtain algorithms for computing the number of triangulations, matchings, and spanning cycles of $P$. The running time of our algorithms is upper bounded by $n^{O(k)}$, where $k$ is the number of onion layers of $P$. In particular, for $k = O(1)$ our algorithms run in polynomial time. In addition, we show that our algorithm for counting triangulations is never slower than $O^{*}(3.1414^{n})$, even when $k = Θ(n)$. Given that there are several well-studied configurations of points with at least $Ω(3.464^{n})$ triangulations, and some even with $Ω(8^{n})$ triangulations, our algorithm asymptotically outperforms any enumeration algorithm for such instances. In fact, it is widely believed that any set of $n$ points must have at least $Ω(3.464^{n})$ triangulations. If this is true, then our algorithm is strictly sub-linear in the number of triangulations counted. We also show that our techniques are general enough to solve the "Restricted-Triangulation-Counting-Problem", which we prove to be $W[2]$-hard in the parameter $k$. This implies a "no free lunch" result: In order to be fixed-parameter tractable, our general algorithm must rely on additional properties that are specific to the considered class of structures.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

On Totally Positive Matrices and Geometric Incidences

A matrix is called totally positive if every minor of it is positive. Such matrices are well studied and have numerous applications in Mathematics and Computer Science. We study how many times the value of a minor can repeat in a totally positive matrix and show interesting connections with incidence problems in combinatorial geometry. We prove that the maximum possible number of repeated $d \times d$-minors in a $d \times n$ totally-positive matrix is $O(n^{d-\frac{d}{d+1}})$. For the case $d=2$ we also show that our bound is optimal. We consider some special families of totally postive matrices to show non-trivial lower bounds on the number of repeated minors. In doing so, we arrive at a new interesting problem: How many unit-area and axis-parallel rectangles can be spanned by two points in a set of $n$ points in the plane? This problem seems to be interesting in its own right especially since it seem to have a flavor of additive combinatorics and relate to interesting incidence problems where considering only the topology of the curves involved is not enough. We prove an upper bound of $O(n^{\frac{4}{3}})$ and provide a lower bound of $n^{1+\frac{1}{O(\log\log n)}}$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Point Line Cover: The Easy Kernel is Essentially Tight

The input to the NP-hard Point Line Cover problem (PLC) consists of a set $P$ of $n$ points on the plane and a positive integer $k$, and the question is whether there exists a set of at most $k$ lines which pass through all points in $P$. A simple polynomial-time reduction reduces any input to one with at most $k^2$ points. We show that this is essentially tight under standard assumptions. More precisely, unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses to its third level, there is no polynomial-time algorithm that reduces every instance $(P,k)$ of PLC to an equivalent instance with $O(k^{2-ε})$ points, for any $ε>0$. This answers, in the negative, an open problem posed by Lokshtanov (PhD Thesis, 2009). Our proof uses the machinery for deriving lower bounds on the size of kernels developed by Dell and van Melkebeek (STOC 2010). It has two main ingredients: We first show, by reduction from Vertex Cover, that PLC---conditionally---has no kernel of total size $O(k^{2-ε})$ bits. This does not directly imply the claimed lower bound on the number of points, since the best known polynomial-time encoding of a PLC instance with $n$ points requires $ω(n^{2})$ bits. To get around this we build on work of Goodman et al. (STOC 1989) and devise an oracle communication protocol of cost $O(n\log n)$ for PLC; its main building block is a bound of $O(n^{O(n)})$ for the order types of $n$ points that are not necessarily in general position, and an explicit algorithm that enumerates all possible order types of n points. This protocol and the lower bound on total size together yield the stated lower bound on the number of points. While a number of essentially tight polynomial lower bounds on total sizes of kernels are known, our result is---to the best of our knowledge---the first to show a nontrivial lower bound for structural/secondary parameters.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access