arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1807.01804

Optimal Ball Recycling

Michael A. Bender·Jake Christensen·Alex Conway·Martín Farach-Colton·Rob Johnson·Meng-Tsung Tsai
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Balls-and-bins games have been a wildly successful tool for modeling load balancing problems. In this paper, we study a new scenario, which we call the ball recycling game, defined as follows: Throw m balls into n bins i.i.d. according to a given probability distribution p. Then, at each time step, pick a non-empty bin and recycle its balls: take the balls from the selected bin and re-throw them according to p. This balls-and-bins game closely models memory-access heuristics in databases. The goal is to have a bin-picking method that maximizes the recycling rate, defined to be the expected number of balls recycled per step in the stationary distribution. We study two natural strategies for ball recycling: Fullest Bin, which greedily picks the bin with the maximum number of balls, and Random Ball, which picks a ball at random and recycles its bin. We show that for general p, Random Ball is constant-optimal, whereas Fullest Bin can be pessimal. However, when p = u, the uniform distribution, Fullest Bin is optimal to within an additive constant.

Explore related subjects

cs.DS

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Michael A. Bender, Jake Christensen, Alex Conway, Martín Farach-Colton, Rob Johnson, Meng-Tsung Tsai. 2018-07-04. Optimal Ball Recycling. https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.01804

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↗