Paper detail

Online Graph Matching Problems with a Worst-Case Reassignment Budget

In the online bipartite matching with reassignments problem, an algorithm is initially given only one side of the vertex set of a bipartite graph; the vertices on the other side are revealed to the algorithm one by one, along with its incident edges. The algorithm is required to maintain a matching in the current graph, where the algorithm revises the matching after each vertex arrival by reassigning vertices. Bernstein, Holm, and Rotenberg showed that an online algorithm can maintain a matching of maximum cardinality by performing amortized $O(\log^2 n)$ reassignments per arrival. In this paper, we propose to consider the general question of how requiring a non-amortized hard budget $k$ on the number of reassignments affects the algorithms' performances, under various models from the literature. We show that a simple, widely-used algorithm is a best-possible deterministic algorithm for all these models. For the unweighted maximum-cardinality problem, the algorithm is a $(1-\frac{2}{k+2})$-competitive algorithm, which is the best possible for a deterministic algorithm both under vertex arrivals and edge arrivals. Applied to the load balancing problem, this yields a bifactor online algorithm. For the weighted problem, which is traditionally studied assuming the triangle inequality, we show that the power of reassignment allows us to lift this assumption and the algorithm becomes a $\frac{1}{2}$-competitive algorithm for $k=4$, improving upon the $\frac{1}{3}$ of the previous algorithm without reassignments. We show that this also is a best-possible deterministic algorithm.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.