Paper detail

The Variable-Processor Cup Game

The problem of scheduling tasks on $p$ processors so that no task ever gets too far behind is often described as a game with cups and water. In the $p$-processor cup game on $n$ cups, there are two players, a filler and an emptier, that take turns adding and removing water from a set of $n$ cups. In each turn, the filler adds $p$ units of water to the cups, placing at most $1$ unit of water in each cup, and then the emptier selects $p$ cups to remove up to $1$ unit of water from. The emptier's goal is to minimize the backlog, which is the height of the fullest cup. The $p$-processor cup game has been studied in many different settings, dating back to the late 1960's. All of the past work shares one common assumption: that $p$ is fixed. This paper initiates the study of what happens when the number of available processors $p$ varies over time, resulting in what we call the \emph{variable-processor cup game}. Remarkably, the optimal bounds for the variable-processor cup game differ dramatically from its classical counterpart. Whereas the $p$-processor cup has optimal backlog $Θ(\log n)$, the variable-processor game has optimal backlog $Θ(n)$. Moreover, there is an efficient filling strategy that yields backlog $Ω(n^{1 - ε})$ in quasi-polynomial time against any deterministic emptying strategy. We additionally show that straightforward uses of randomization cannot be used to help the emptier. In particular, for any positive constant $Δ$, and any $Δ$-greedy-like randomized emptying algorithm $\mathcal{A}$, there is a filling strategy that achieves backlog $Ω(n^{1 - ε})$ against $\mathcal{A}$ in quasi-polynomial time.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.