SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2602.22108

Tight Bounds for Online Scheduling in the One-Fast-Many-Slow Machines Setting

Abstract

In the One-Fast-Many-Slow decision problem, introduced by Sheffield and Westover (ITCS '25), a scheduler, with access to one fast machine and infinitely many slow machines, receives a series of tasks and must allocate the work among its machines. The goal is to minimize the overhead of an online algorithm over the optimal offline algorithm. Three versions of this setting were considered: Instantly-committing schedulers that must assign tasks to machines immediately and irrevocably, Eventually-committing schedulers whose assignments are irrevocable but can occur anytime after a task arrives, and Never-committing schedulers that can interrupt and restart a task on a different machine. In the Instantly-committing model, Sheffield and Westover showed that the optimal competitive ratio is equal to 2, while in the Eventually-committing model the competitive ratio lies in the interval [1.618, 1.678], and in the Never-committing model the competitive ratio lies in the interval [1.366, 1.5] (SPAA '24, ITCS '25). In the latter two models, the exact optimal competitive ratios were left as open problems, moreover Kuszmaul and Westover (SPAA '24) conjectured that the lower bound in the Eventually-committing model is tight. In this paper we resolve this problem by providing tight bounds for the competitive ratios in the Eventually-committing and Never-committing models. For Eventually-committing, we prove Kuszmaul and Westover's conjecture by giving an algorithm achieving a competitive ratio equal to the lower bound of $\frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2}\approx 1.618$. For Never-committing, we provide an explicit Task Arrival Process (TAP) lower bounding the competitive ratio to the previous upper bound of 1.5.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

John Jeang, Vladimir Podolskii. 2026-02-25. Tight Bounds for Online Scheduling in the One-Fast-Many-Slow Machines Setting. https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.22108

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