arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1003.1507

On Column-restricted and Priority Covering Integer Programs

Deeparnab Chakrabarty·Elyot Grant·Jochen Koenemann
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In a column-restricted covering integer program (CCIP), all the non-zero entries of any column of the constraint matrix are equal. Such programs capture capacitated versions of covering problems. In this paper, we study the approximability of CCIPs, in particular, their relation to the integrality gaps of the underlying 0,1-CIP. If the underlying 0,1-CIP has an integrality gap O(gamma), and assuming that the integrality gap of the priority version of the 0,1-CIP is O(omega), we give a factor O(gamma + omega) approximation algorithm for the CCIP. Priority versions of 0,1-CIPs (PCIPs) naturally capture quality of service type constraints in a covering problem. We investigate priority versions of the line (PLC) and the (rooted) tree cover (PTC) problems. Apart from being natural objects to study, these problems fall in a class of fundamental geometric covering problems. We bound the integrality of certain classes of this PCIP by a constant. Algorithmically, we give a polytime exact algorithm for PLC, show that the PTC problem is APX-hard, and give a factor 2-approximation algorithm for it.

Explore related subjects

cs.DS

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Deeparnab Chakrabarty, Elyot Grant, Jochen Koenemann. 2010-03-07. On Column-restricted and Priority Covering Integer Programs. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13036-6_27

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↗