arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 1605.08107

Dominance Product and High-Dimensional Closest Pair under $L_\infty$

Abstract

Given a set $S$ of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^d$, the Closest Pair problem is to find a pair of distinct points in $S$ at minimum distance. When $d$ is constant, there are efficient algorithms that solve this problem, and fast approximate solutions for general $d$. However, obtaining an exact solution in very high dimensions seems to be much less understood. We consider the high-dimensional $L_\infty$ Closest Pair problem, where $d=n^r$ for some $r > 0$, and the underlying metric is $L_\infty$. We improve and simplify previous results for $L_\infty$ Closest Pair, showing that it can be solved by a deterministic strongly-polynomial algorithm that runs in $O(DP(n,d)\log n)$ time, and by a randomized algorithm that runs in $O(DP(n,d))$ expected time, where $DP(n,d)$ is the time bound for computing the {\em dominance product} for $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^d$. That is a matrix $D$, such that $D[i,j] = \bigl| \{k \mid p_i[k] \leq p_j[k]\} \bigr|$; this is the number of coordinates at which $p_j$ dominates $p_i$. For integer coordinates from some interval $[-M, M]$, we obtain an algorithm that runs in $\tilde{O}\left(\min\{Mn^{ω(1,r,1)},\, DP(n,d)\}\right)$ time, where $ω(1,r,1)$ is the exponent of multiplying an $n \times n^r$ matrix by an $n^r \times n$ matrix. We also give slightly better bounds for $DP(n,d)$, by using more recent rectangular matrix multiplication bounds. Computing the dominance product itself is an important task, since it is applied in many algorithms as a major black-box ingredient, such as algorithms for APBP (all pairs bottleneck paths), and variants of APSP (all pairs shortest paths).

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Omer Gold, Micha Sharir. 2017-06-24. Dominance Product and High-Dimensional Closest Pair under $L_\infty$. https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.08107

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