Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1802.01754

How to select the best set of ads: Can we do better than Greedy Algorithm?

Xinle Liu
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Selecting the best set of ads is critical for advertisers for a given set of keywords, which involves the composition of ads from millions of candidates. While click through rates (CTRs) are important, there could be high correlation among different ads, therefore the set of ads with top CTRs does not necessarily maximize the number of clicks. Greedy algorithm has been a standard and straightforward way to find out a decent enough solution, however, it is not guaranteed to be the global optimum. In fact, it proves not to be the global optimum more than 70% of the time across all our simulations, implying that it's very likely to be trapped at a local optimum. In this paper, we propose a Greedy-Power Algorithm to find out the best set of creatives, that is starting with the solution from the conventional Greedy Algorithm, one can perform another Greedy Algorithm search on top of it, with the option of a few or even infinite rounds. The Greedy-Power algorithm is guaranteed to be not worse, as it only moves in the direction to increase the goal function. We show that Greedy-Power Algorithm's performance is consistently better, and reach the conclusion that it is able to perform better than the Greedy Algorithm systematically.

Explore related subjects

cs.DS

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Xinle Liu. 2018-02-06. How to select the best set of ads: Can we do better than Greedy Algorithm?. https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.01754

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Quasi-Monte Carlo Beyond Hardy-Krause II: $(1 + \varepsilon)n$ Samples Suffice

Numerical integration studies how well one can estimate the integral of a function $f$ over $[0,1)^d$ using $n$ sample points. The two classical methods, Monte Carlo (MC) and quasi-Monte Carlo (QMC), have complementary strengths and weaknesses, and a fundamental question is to design an approach that combines the benefits of both. Recently, building on the transference principle in discrepancy theory, Bansal and Jiang~\cite{BJ25a} gave a randomized QMC method that bridges MC and QMC guarantees using only i.i.d.\ samples. Their method also goes beyond the classical Koksma--Hlawka inequality: it achieves integration error $\widetilde{O}_d(\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)/n)$, where the smoothed-out variation $\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)$ can be substantially smaller than the Hardy--Krause variation that governs the classical bound. However, their algorithm requires $n^2$ i.i.d.\ samples as input, and this quadratic blowup is inherent to any method based on the transference principle. In this work, we bypass the quadratic blowup: for any constant $\varepsilon > 0$, we show that $(1+\varepsilon)n$ i.i.d.\ samples suffice to both obtain the beyond-Hardy--Krause guarantee of~\cite{BJ25a}, resolving an open problem posed there, and to produce low-discrepancy point sequences. Our algorithms are variants of the online Haar-thinning method of Dwivedi, Feldheim, Gurel-Gurevich, and Ramdas~\cite{DFG+19}.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2026

Single-Exponential Algorithms and a Polynomial Kernel for Strong Connectivity Augmentation

Strong Connectivity Augmentation (SCA) asks whether a directed acyclic graph can be made strongly connected by adding at most $k$ prescribed links whose total weight is within a given budget. Klinkby, Misra, and Saurabh (SODA 2021) gave an $O^*(2^{O(k\log k)})$-time algorithm and asked whether the problem admits a single-exponential parameterized algorithm and a polynomial kernel. We answer both questions affirmatively: SCA can be solved in $O^*(9^k)$ time and admits a polynomial kernel with $O(k^4)$ vertices and $O(k^{16})$ bits. For unweighted SCA, we obtain $O^*(4^k)$ time and a kernel with $O(k^3)$ vertices. Our algorithms are based on a particularly simple reduction to Strongly Connected Spanning Subgraph with two edge costs.

cs.DS↗