SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2101.01631

On the Approximation Relationship between Optimizing Ratio of Submodular (RS) and Difference of Submodular (DS) Functions

Abstract

We demonstrate that from an algorithm guaranteeing an approximation factor for the ratio of submodular (RS) optimization problem, we can build another algorithm having a different kind of approximation guarantee -- weaker than the classical one -- for the difference of submodular (DS) optimization problem, and vice versa. We also illustrate the link between these two problems by analyzing a \textsc{Greedy} algorithm which approximately maximizes objective functions of the form $\Psi(f,g)$, where $f,g$ are two non-negative, monotone, submodular functions and $\Psi$ is a {quasiconvex} 2-variables function, which is non decreasing with respect to the first variable. For the choice $\Psi(f,g)\triangleq f/g$, we recover RS, and for the choice $\Psi(f,g)\triangleq f-g$, we recover DS. To the best of our knowledge, this greedy approach is new for DS optimization. For RS optimization, it reduces to the standard \textsc{GreedRatio} algorithm that has already been analyzed previously. However, our analysis is novel for this case.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Pierre Perrault, Jennifer Healey, Zheng Wen, Michal Valko. 2021-01-05. On the Approximation Relationship between Optimizing Ratio of Submodular (RS) and Difference of Submodular (DS) Functions. https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.01631

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

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

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