SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2607.22312

An optimal deterministic algorithm for finding a strict saddlepoint

Abstract

Given an $n\times n$ matrix $A$, a saddlepoint of $A$ is an entry that is the maximum in its row and the minimum in its column. It is a strict saddlepoint if no other entry in its row or column has the same value. Finding a non-strict saddlepoint requires $\Theta(n^2)$ matrix queries in the worst case. In contrast, a strict saddlepoint can be found with only $O(n)$ queries. In 1991, Bienstock, Chung, Fredman, Sch\"affer, Shor, and Suri---and, independently, Byrne and Vaserstein---showed that one can find a strict saddlepoint (or certify that none exists) in $O(n\log n)$ time using $O(n)$ matrix queries. In 2024, Dallant, Haagensen, Jacob, Kozma, and Wild gave an $O(n\log^* n)$-time algorithm, followed shortly after by an optimal randomized algorithm running in $O(n)$ time with high probability. Whether $O(n)$ time could also be achieved deterministically was left open by these works. Here we resolve this question by presenting a simple deterministic algorithm that finds a strict saddlepoint, or reports that none exists, in optimal $O(n)$ time. Our algorithm combines elementary ingredients from previous approaches with linear-time selection from a collection of sorted lists.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Justin Dallant. 2026-07-24. An optimal deterministic algorithm for finding a strict saddlepoint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.22312

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