Paper detail

Randomization can be as helpful as a glimpse of the future in online computation

We provide simple but surprisingly useful direct product theorems for proving lower bounds on online algorithms with a limited amount of advice about the future. As a consequence, we are able to translate decades of research on randomized online algorithms to the advice complexity model. Doing so improves significantly on the previous best advice complexity lower bounds for many online problems, or provides the first known lower bounds. For example, if $n$ is the number of requests, we show that: (1) A paging algorithm needs $Ω(n)$ bits of advice to achieve a competitive ratio better than $H_k=Ω(\log k)$, where $k$ is the cache size. Previously, it was only known that $Ω(n)$ bits of advice were necessary to achieve a constant competitive ratio smaller than $5/4$. (2) Every $O(n^{1-\varepsilon})$-competitive vertex coloring algorithm must use $Ω(n\log n)$ bits of advice. Previously, it was only known that $Ω(n\log n)$ bits of advice were necessary to be optimal. For certain online problems, including the MTS, $k$-server, paging, list update, and dynamic binary search tree problem, our results imply that randomization and sublinear advice are equally powerful (if the underlying metric space or node set is finite). This means that several long-standing open questions regarding randomized online algorithms can be equivalently stated as questions regarding online algorithms with sublinear advice. For example, we show that there exists a deterministic $O(\log k)$-competitive $k$-server algorithm with advice complexity $o(n)$ if and only if there exists a randomized $O(\log k)$-competitive $k$-server algorithm without advice. Technically, our main direct product theorem is obtained by extending an information theoretical lower bound technique due to Emek, Fraigniaud, Korman, and Rosén [ICALP'09].

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 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.