1 / 16

Generalized Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-Type Metrics

Generalized Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-Type Metrics. Shuchi Chawla, Anupam Gupta, Harald R ä cke Carnegie Mellon University 1/25/05. capacity of cut links demand across cut. Sparsity of a cut =. Finding Bottlenecks.

alize
Télécharger la présentation

Generalized Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-Type Metrics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Generalized Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-Type Metrics Shuchi Chawla, Anupam Gupta, Harald Räcke Carnegie Mellon University 1/25/05

  2. capacity of cut links demand across cut Sparsity of a cut = Finding Bottlenecks • Find the cut across which demand exceeds capacity by the largest factor Sparsest cut Capacity = 2.1 units Demand = 3 units 1 Sparsity of the cut = 0.7 10 0.1 Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  3. The Generalized Sparsest Cut Problem • The givens: a graph G=(V,E) capacities on edges c(e) demands on pairs of vertices D(x,y) • Sparsity of a cut S  V, (S) = (S)c(e) xS, yS D(x,y) • Sparsity of graph G, (G) = minSV(S) • Our result: an O(log¾n)-approximation for (G) V S\V Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  4. What’s known • Uniform-demands – a special case D(x,y) = 1 for all x  y • O(log n)-approx [Leighton Rao’88] based on LP-rounding • Cannot do better than O(log n) using the LP • O(log n)-approx [Arora Rao Vazirani’04] based on an SDP relaxation • General case • O(log n)-approx [Linial London Rabinovich’95 Aumann Rabani’98] based on LP-rounding and low-distortion embeddings • Our result: O(log¾n)-approx Extends [ARV04] using the same SDP Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  5. (d) = ec(e) d(e) x,y D(x,y) d(x,y) A metrics perspective • Given set S, define a “cut” metric S(x,y) = 1 if x and y on different sides of cut (S, V-S) 0 otherwise • (S) = ec(e) S(e) x,y D(x,y) S(x,y) • Finding sparsest cut  minimizing above function over all metrics • Typical technique: Minimize over class ℳ of metrics, with ℳ  ℓ1, and embed into ℓ1 NP-hard ℓ1 cut Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  6. (d) = ec(e) d(e) x,y D(x,y) d(x,y) A metrics perspective • Finding sparsest cut  minimizing a(d) over metrics • Lemma: Minimize over a class ℳ to obtain d + have -distortion embedding from d into  -approx for sparsest cut ℓ1 ℓ1 • When ℳ = all metrics, obtain O(log n) approximation • [Linial London Rabinovich ’95, Aumann Rabani ’98] • Cannot do any better [Leighton Rao ’88] Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  7. (d) = ec(e) d(e) x,y D(x,y) d(x,y) Squared-Euclidean, or ℓ2-metrics 2 A metrics perspective • Finding sparsest cut  minimizing a(d) over metrics • Lemma: Minimize over a class ℳ to obtain d + have -avg-distortion embedding from d into  -approx for “uniform-demands” sparsest cut ℓ1 ℓ1 • ℳ = “negative-type” metrics  O(log n) approx • [Arora Rao Vazirani ’04] • Question: Can we obtain O(log n) for generalized • sparsest cut, • or an O(log n) distortion embedding from into ℓ2 ℓ1 2 Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  8. ℓ2 2 ℓ2 2 Arora et al.’s O(log n)-approx • Solve an SDP relaxation to get the best representation • Key Theorem: Let d be a “well-spread-out” metric. Then m – an embedding from d into a line, such that, - for all pairs (x,y), m(x,y) d(x,y) - for a constant fraction of (x,y), m(x,y)  1 ⁄O(log n) d(x,y) • The general case – issues • Well-spreading does not hold • Constant fraction is not enough Want low distortion for every demand pair. For a const. fraction of (x,y), d(x,y) > const.  diameter Implies an avg. distortion of O(log n) Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  9. 1. Ensuring well-spreading • Divide pairs into groups based on distances Di = { (x,y) : 2i d(x,y)  2i+1 } • At most O(log n) groups • Each group by itself is well-spread, by definition • Embed each group individually • distortion O(log n) contracting embedding into a line for each (assume for now) • “Glue” the embeddings appropriately Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  10. Gluing the groups • Start with an a = O(log n) embedding for each scale • A naïve gluing • concatenate all the embeddings and renormalize by dividing by O(log n) • Distortion O(alog n) = O(log n) • A better gluing lemma • “measured-descent” by Krauthgamer, Lee, Mendel & Naor (2004) (Recall the previous talk by James Lee) • Gives distortion O(a log n) distortion O(log¾n) Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  11. 2. Average to worst-case distortion • Arora et al.’s guarantee – a constant fraction of pairs embed with low distortion • We want – every pair should embed with low distortion • Idea: Re-embed pairs that have high distortion • Problem: Increases the number of embeddings, implying a larger distortion • A “re-weighting” solution: • Don’t ignore low-distortion pairs completely – keep them around and reduce their importance Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  12. Weighting-and-watching • Initialize weight = 1 for each pair • Apply ARV to weighted instance • For pairs with low-distortion, decrease weights by factor of 2 • For other pairs, do nothing • Repeat until total weight < 1/k • Total weight decreases by constant factor every time • O(log k) iterations • Each individual weight decreases from 1 to 1/k • Each pair contributes to W(log k) iterations • Implies low distortion for every pair A constant fraction of the weight is embed with low distortion Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  13. Summarizing… • Start with a solution to the SDP • For every distance scale • Use [ARV04] to embed points into line • Use re-weighting to obtain good worst-case distortion • Combine distance scales using measured-descent • In practice • Write another SDP to find best embedding into • Use J-L to embed into and then into a cut-metric ℓ2 ℓ2 ℓ1 Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  14. ℓ2 2 Recent developements • Arora, Lee & Naor obtained an O(log n log log n) approximation for sparsest cut • The improvement lies in a better concatenation technique • Nearly optimal embedding from into • Evidence for hardness • Khot & Vishnoi:W(log log log n) integrality gap for the SDP l.b. for embedding into • Chawla, Krauthgamer, Kumar, Rabani & Sivakumar: W(log log n) hardness based on “Unique Games Conjecture” • Evidence that constant factor approximation is not possible • Other approximations using similar SDP relaxations • Feige, Hajiaghayi & Lee: O(log n) approx for min-wt. vertex cuts ℓ1 ℓ2 ℓ1 Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  15. Open Problems • Beating the [ALN05] O(log n log log n)approximation • Can the SDP give a better bound? • Exploring flow-based techniques • Closing the gap between hardness and approximation • Other applications of SDP with triangle inequalities • Other partitioning problems • Directed versions? SDP/LP don’t seem to work Sparsest Cut and Embeddings of Negative-type Metrics

  16. Questions?

More Related