Paper detail

Improved Approximation Algorithms for (Budgeted) Node-weighted Steiner Problems

Moss and Rabani[12] study constrained node-weighted Steiner tree problems with two independent weight values associated with each node, namely, cost and prize (or penalty). They give an O(log n)-approximation algorithm for the prize-collecting node-weighted Steiner tree problem (PCST). They use the algorithm for PCST to obtain a bicriteria (2, O(log n))-approximation algorithm for the Budgeted node-weighted Steiner tree problem. Their solution may cost up to twice the budget, but collects a factor Omega(1/log n) of the optimal prize. We improve these results from at least two aspects. Our first main result is a primal-dual O(log h)-approximation algorithm for a more general problem, prize-collecting node-weighted Steiner forest, where we have (h) demands each requesting the connectivity of a pair of vertices. Our algorithm can be seen as a greedy algorithm which reduces the number of demands by choosing a structure with minimum cost-to-reduction ratio. This natural style of argument (also used by Klein and Ravi[10] and Guha et al.[8]) leads to a much simpler algorithm than that of Moss and Rabani[12] for PCST. Our second main contribution is for the Budgeted node-weighted Steiner tree problem, which is also an improvement to [12] and [8]. In the unrooted case, we improve upon an O(log^2(n))-approximation of [8], and present an O(log n)-approximation algorithm without any budget violation. For the rooted case, where a specified vertex has to appear in the solution tree, we improve the bicriteria result of [12] to a bicriteria approximation ratio of (1+eps, O(log n)/(eps^2)) for any positive (possibly subconstant) (eps). That is, for any permissible budget violation (1+eps), we present an algorithm achieving a tradeoff in the guarantee for prize. Indeed, we show that this is almost tight for the natural linear-programming relaxation used by us as well as in [12].

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.