arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 1608.06666

Synergistic Sorting, MultiSelection and Deferred Data Structures on MultiSets

Abstract

Karp et al. (1988) described Deferred Data Structures for Multisets as "lazy" data structures which partially sort data to support online rank and select queries, with the minimum amount of work in the worst case over instances of size $n$ and number of queries $q$ fixed (i.e., the query size). Barbay et al. (2016) refined this approach to take advantage of the gaps between the positions hit by the queries (i.e., the structure in the queries). We develop new techniques in order to further refine this approach and to take advantage all at once of the structure (i.e., the multiplicities of the elements), the local order (i.e., the number and sizes of runs) and the global order (i.e., the number and positions of existing pivots) in the input; and of the structure and order in the sequence of queries. Our main result is a synergistic deferred data structure which performs much better on large classes of instances, while performing always asymptotically as good as previous solutions. As intermediate results, we describe two new synergistic sorting algorithms, which take advantage of the structure and order (local and global) in the input, improving upon previous results which take advantage only of the structure (Munro and Spira 1979) or of the local order (Takaoka 1997) in the input; and one new multiselection algorithm which takes advantage of not only the order and structure in the input, but also of the structure in the queries. We described two compressed data structures to represent a multiset taking advantage of both the local order and structure, while supporting the operators rank and select on the multiset.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jérémy Barbay, Carlos Ochoa, Srinivasa Rao Satti. 2016-09-30. Synergistic Sorting, MultiSelection and Deferred Data Structures on MultiSets. https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.06666

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Online Flexible Busy Time Scheduling on Heterogeneous Machines

We study the online busy time scheduling model on heterogeneous machines. In our setting, jobs with uniform processing time arrive online with a deadline that becomes known to the algorithm at the job's arrival time. An algorithm has access to machines, each with different associated capacities and costs. The goal is to schedule jobs on machines by their deadline, so that the total cost incurred by the scheduling algorithm is minimized. While busy time scheduling has been well-studied, relatively little is known when machines are heterogeneous (i.e., have different costs and capacities), despite this natural theoretical generalization being the most practical model for clients using cloud computing services. We make significant progress in understanding this model by designing a deterministic online algorithm with competitive ratio 8(2p-1)/p < 16 when all jobs have uniform processing time p. A randomized version of this algorithm is 4(2p-1)/(p \ln 2)-competitive against an oblivious adversary. For unit-processing-time jobs, we give lower bounds of 4 and e (where e is Euler's number) on the competitive ratio of deterministic and randomized online algorithms, respectively. For unit-processing-time jobs with agreeable deadlines, we provide a deterministic 2-competitive online algorithm and a matching lower bound.

cs.DS

The Binary Tree Mechanism is Optimal for Differentially Private Continual Counting

Private continual counting is a fundamental problem in differential privacy: given a binary stream of length $n$, where each $1$ corresponds to the contribution of one individual, the goal is to release all running counts while protecting the privacy of each individual. For fixed privacy parameters, the standard binary tree mechanism achieves expected $\ell_\infty$ error $O(\log^{3/2} n)$ under approximate differential privacy and $O(\log^2 n)$ under pure differential privacy. Whether these dependences on the stream length are necessary has remained a central open problem. For fixed $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$, we prove a lower bound of $Ω(\log^{3/2} n)$ under approximate DP with sufficiently small fixed $δ>0$, and a lower bound of $Ω(\log^2 n)$ under pure DP. These bounds establish the optimality of the binary tree mechanism in both settings. The bounds hold for arbitrary mechanisms, even when the entire stream is available in advance. Both proofs use the same decomposition and accumulation of residual noise along a tree. As a consequence of the approximate-DP bound, we also obtain a largest-possible separation between hereditary discrepancy and private $\ell_\infty$ error for linear queries, showing that the known general upper bound in terms of hereditary discrepancy has the optimal dependence on the number of queries.

cs.DS

Directed Hamiltonian-Cycle Parity in $O^*((3/2)^n)$ Deterministic Time and Polynomial Space

We give a deterministic algorithm that computes the parity of the number of Hamiltonian cycles in an $n$-vertex directed graph in $O(n^4(3/2)^n)$ time and $O(n^2)$ bits of working space, improving the $O^*(φ^n)$ bound of Björklund and Husfeldt. Their local-degree formula reduces the problem to a weighted sum over solutions of structured quadratic equations. We cover the corresponding ternary state space by binary subcubes, each inducing an affine system. The Kuang--Wang cover can be regenerated within the target bound; canonical ownership resolves its overlaps, while self-loop conditional expectations bound every affine solution visit. Rollback elimination shares the work across cover prefixes. The same cover gives a Las Vegas algorithm listing all $L$ solutions of $m$ affine product constraints in $N$ Boolean variables in expected time $\operatorname{poly}(N,m)((3/2)^m+L)$ and polynomial space. Finally, we show that complete enumeration can require $Ω((3/2)^n)$ visits even on strongly connected digraphs after an optimal self-loop choice. This is a limitation of the enumeration method, not a general lower bound for Hamiltonian-cycle parity.

cs.DS