Paper detail

Greedy is good: An experimental study on minimum clique cover and maximum independent set problems for randomly generated rectangles

Given a set ${\cal R}=\{R_1,R_2,..., R_n\}$ of $n$ randomly positioned axis parallel rectangles in 2D, the problem of computing the minimum clique cover (MCC) and maximum independent set (MIS) for the intersection graph $G({\cal R})$ of the members in $\cal R$ are both computationally hard \cite{CC05}. For the MCC problem, it is proved that polynomial time constant factor approximation is impossible to obtain \cite{PT11}. Though such a result is not proved yet for the MIS problem, no polynomial time constant factor approximation algorithm exists in the literature. We study the performance of greedy algorithms for computing these two parameters of $G({\cal R})$. Experimental results shows that for each of the MCC and MIS problems, the corresponding greedy algorithm produces a solution that is very close to its optimum solution. Scheinerman \cite{Scheinerman80} showed that the size of MIS is tightly bounded by $\sqrt{n}$ for a random instance of the 1D version of the problem, (i.e., for the interval graph). Our experiment shows that the size of independent set and the clique cover produced by the greedy algorithm is at least $2\sqrt{n}$ and at most $3\sqrt{n}$, respectively. Thus the experimentally obtained approximation ratio of the greedy algorithm for MIS problem is at most 3/2 and the same for the MCC problem is at least 2/3. Finally we will provide refined greedy algorithms based on a concept of {\it simplicial rectangle}. The characteristics of this algorithm may be of interest in getting a provably constant factor approximation algorithm for random instance of both the problems. We believe that the result also holds true for any finite dimension.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.