SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2310.16801

Finding the saddlepoint faster than sorting

Abstract

A saddlepoint of an $n \times n$ matrix $A$ is an entry of $A$ that is a maximum in its row and a minimum in its column. Knuth (1968) gave several different algorithms for finding a saddlepoint. The worst-case running time of these algorithms is $\Theta(n^2)$, and Llewellyn, Tovey, and Trick (1988) showed that this cannot be improved, as in the worst case all entries of A may need to be queried. A strict saddlepoint of $A$ is an entry that is the strict maximum in its row and the strict minimum in its column. The strict saddlepoint (if it exists) is unique, and Bienstock, Chung, Fredman, Sch\"affer, Shor, and Suri (1991) showed that it can be found in time $O(n \log{n})$, where a dominant runtime contribution is sorting the diagonal of the matrix. This upper bound has not been improved since 1991. In this paper we show that the strict saddlepoint can be found in $O(n \log^{*}{n})$ time, where $\log^{*}$ denotes the very slowly growing iterated logarithm function, coming close to the lower bound of $\Omega(n)$. In fact, we can also compute, within the same runtime, the value of a non-strict saddlepoint, assuming one exists. Our algorithm is based on a simple recursive approach, a feasibility test inspired by searching in sorted matrices, and a relaxed notion of saddlepoint.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Justin Dallant, Frederik Haagensen, Riko Jacob, László Kozma, Sebastian Wild. 2023-10-25. Finding the saddlepoint faster than sorting. https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.16801

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