Abstract
We prove that no online algorithm (even randomized, against an oblivious adversary) is better than 1/2-competitive for welfare maximization with coverage valuations, unless . Since the Greedy algorithm is known to be 1/2-competitive for monotone submodular valuations, of which coverage is a special case, this proves that Greedy provides the optimal competitive ratio. On the other hand, we prove that Greedy in a stochastic setting with i.i.d.items and valuations satisfying diminishing returns is -competitive, which is optimal even for coverage valuations, unless . For online budget-additive allocation, we prove that no algorithm can be 0.612-competitive with respect to a natural LP which has been used previously for this problem.
Connections
Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.
Building this map preview
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Reviews 0
Write a review
No reviews yet.
Discussion 0
Add a comment
No comments yet.