Paper detail

Stochastic dominance and the bijective ratio of online algorithms

Stochastic dominance is a technique for evaluating the performance of online algorithms that provides an intuitive, yet powerful stochastic order between the compared algorithms. Accordingly this holds for bijective analysis, which can be interpreted as stochastic dominance assuming the uniform distribution over requests. These techniques have been applied to some online problems, and have provided a clear separation between algorithms whose performance varies significantly in practice. However, there are situations in which they are not readily applicable due to the fact that they stipulate a stringent relation between the compared algorithms. In this paper, we propose remedies for these shortcomings. First, we establish sufficient conditions that allow us to prove the bijective optimality of a certain class of algorithms for a wide range of problems; we demonstrate this approach in the context of some well-studied online problems. Second, to account for situations in which two algorithms are incomparable or there is no clear optimum, we introduce the bijective ratio as a natural extension of (exact) bijective analysis. Our definition readily generalizes to stochastic dominance. This renders the concept of bijective analysis (and that of stochastic dominance) applicable to all online problems, and allows for the incorporation of other useful techniques such as amortized analysis. We demonstrate the applicability of the bijective ratio to one of the fundamental online problems, namely the continuous $k$-server problem on metrics such as the line, the circle, and the star. Among other results, we show that the greedy algorithm attains bijective ratios of $O(k)$ consistently across these metrics. These results confirm extensive previous studies that gave evidence of the efficiency of this algorithm on said metrics in practice, which, however, is not reflected in competitive analysis.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.