Paper detail

Hopcroft's Problem, Log-Star Shaving, 2D Fractional Cascading, and Decision Trees

We revisit Hopcroft's problem and related fundamental problems about geometric range searching. Given $n$ points and $n$ lines in the plane, we show how to count the number of point-line incidence pairs or the number of point-above-line pairs in $O(n^{4/3})$ time, which matches the conjectured lower bound and improves the best previous time bound of $n^{4/3}2^{O(\log^*n)}$ obtained almost 30 years ago by Matoušek. We describe two interesting and different ways to achieve the result: the first is randomized and uses a new 2D version of fractional cascading for arrangements of lines; the second is deterministic and uses decision trees in a manner inspired by the sorting technique of Fredman (1976). The second approach extends to any constant dimension. Many consequences follow from these new ideas: for example, we obtain an $O(n^{4/3})$-time algorithm for line segment intersection counting in the plane, $O(n^{4/3})$-time randomized algorithms for bichromatic closest pair and Euclidean minimum spanning tree in three or four dimensions, and a randomized data structure for halfplane range counting in the plane with $O(n^{4/3})$ preprocessing time and space and $O(n^{1/3})$ query time.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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.