arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2009.07925

Competitive Ratios for Online Multi-capacity Ridesharing

Meghna Lowalekar·Pradeep Varakantham·Patrick Jaillet
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In multi-capacity ridesharing, multiple requests (e.g., customers, food items, parcels) with different origin and destination pairs travel in one resource. In recent years, online multi-capacity ridesharing services (i.e., where assignments are made online) like Uber-pool, foodpanda, and on-demand shuttles have become hugely popular in transportation, food delivery, logistics and other domains. This is because multi-capacity ridesharing services benefit all parties involved { the customers (due to lower costs), the drivers (due to higher revenues) and the matching platforms (due to higher revenues per vehicle/resource). Most importantly these services can also help reduce carbon emissions (due to fewer vehicles on roads). Online multi-capacity ridesharing is extremely challenging as the underlying matching graph is no longer bipartite (as in the unit-capacity case) but a tripartite graph with resources (e.g., taxis, cars), requests and request groups (combinations of requests that can travel together). The desired matching between resources and request groups is constrained by the edges between requests and request groups in this tripartite graph (i.e., a request can be part of at most one request group in the final assignment). While there have been myopic heuristic approaches employed for solving the online multi-capacity ridesharing problem, they do not provide any guarantees on the solution quality. To that end, this paper presents the first approach with bounds on the competitive ratio for online multi-capacity ridesharing (when resources rejoin the system at their initial location/depot after serving a group of requests).

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.DS

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Meghna Lowalekar, Pradeep Varakantham, Patrick Jaillet. 2020-09-16. Competitive Ratios for Online Multi-capacity Ridesharing. https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.07925

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗