Paper detail

Advice Complexity of Online Non-Crossing Matching

We study online matching in the Euclidean $2$-dimesional plane with non-crossing constraint. The offline version was introduced by Atallah in 1985 and the online version was introduced and studied more recently by Bose et al. The input to the problem consists of a sequence of points, and upon arrival of a point an algorithm can match it with a previously unmatched point provided that line segments corresponding to the matched edges do not intersect. The decisions are irrevocable, and while an optimal offline solution always matches all the points, an online algorithm cannot match all the points in the worst case, unless it is given some side information, i.e., advice. We study two versions of this problem -- monomchromatic (MNM) and bichromatic (BNM). We show that advice complexity of solving BNM optimally on a circle (or, more generally, on inputs in a convex position) is tightly bounded by the logarithm of the $n^\text{th}$ Catalan number from above and below. This result corrects the previous claim of Bose et al. that the advice complexity is $\log(n!)$. At the heart of the result is a connection between non-crossing constraint in online inputs and $231$-avoiding property of permutations of $n$ elements We also show a lower bound of $n/3-1$ and an upper bound of $3n$ on the advice complexity for MNM on a plane. This gives an exponential improvement over the previously best known lower bound and an improvement in the constant of the leading term in the upper bound. In addition, we establish a lower bound of $\fracα{2}\infdiv{\frac{2(1-α)}α}{1/4}n$ on the advice complexity for achieving competitive ratio $α$ for MNM on a circle. Standard tools from advice complexity, such as partition trees and reductions from string guessing problem, do not seem to apply to MNM/BNM, so we have to design our lower bounds from first principles.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.