Paper detail

Tighter Estimates for epsilon-nets for Disks

The geometric hitting set problem is one of the basic geometric combinatorial optimization problems: given a set $P$ of points, and a set $\mathcal{D}$ of geometric objects in the plane, the goal is to compute a small-sized subset of $P$ that hits all objects in $\mathcal{D}$. In 1994, Bronniman and Goodrich made an important connection of this problem to the size of fundamental combinatorial structures called $ε$-nets, showing that small-sized $ε$-nets imply approximation algorithms with correspondingly small approximation ratios. Very recently, Agarwal and Pan showed that their scheme can be implemented in near-linear time for disks in the plane. Altogether this gives $O(1)$-factor approximation algorithms in $\tilde{O}(n)$ time for hitting sets for disks in the plane. This constant factor depends on the sizes of $ε$-nets for disks; unfortunately, the current state-of-the-art bounds are large -- at least $24/ε$ and most likely larger than $40/ε$. Thus the approximation factor of the Agarwal and Pan algorithm ends up being more than $40$. The best lower-bound is $2/ε$, which follows from the Pach-Woeginger construction for halfspaces in two dimensions. Thus there is a large gap between the best-known upper and lower bounds. Besides being of independent interest, finding precise bounds is important since this immediately implies an improved linear-time algorithm for the hitting-set problem. The main goal of this paper is to improve the upper-bound to $13.4/ε$ for disks in the plane. The proof is constructive, giving a simple algorithm that uses only Delaunay triangulations. We have implemented the algorithm, which is available as a public open-source module. Experimental results show that the sizes of $ε$-nets for a variety of data-sets is lower, around $9/ε$.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.