Reconnect - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Reconnect

Description:

No preemption, one machine. Cj = completion time of job Jj. Goal: ... No preemption. One job at a time. Precedence constraints. Midpoint of Jj Midpoint of Jk ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:55
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 31
Provided by: willia112
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Reconnect


1
Reconnect 04LP-Based Approximation Algorithms
  • Cynthia Phillips
  • Sandia National Laboratories

2
Linear Programming (LP) Relaxation-Based
Approximation
  • Variables can take rational values (relax
    integrality constraints)
  • Efficiently solvable gives lower bound on
    optimal IP solution
  • Common technique
  • Use structural information from LP solution to
    find feasible IP solution
  • Bound quality using LP bound
  • Integrality gap (best IP solution)/(best LP
    solution)
  • This technique cannot prove anything better than
    integrality gap

3
Integer Program (IP) for capacitated network
design
  • A simple IP for capacitated network design
  • Where d(C) is the maximum demand di for any pair
    that crosses cut C
  • xe 1 if edge e is selected

4
Knapsack Cover (KC) Inequalities
A
C
5
Finding An Approximate Solution
  • Let
  • Set of edges at least half selected by LP
  • Select all these edges
  • Increases cost (for A) by factor of 2
  • Now much meet demand D(A) D - u(A) with rest of
    edges

6
Finding an Approximate Solutions
  • Sort edge by ue
  • Consider the three cases

7
Finding an Approximate Solution
  • xe q/p rational
  • r is least common multiple of denominators so rxe
    integral for all e
  • Make 2rxe copies of xe
  • (convex multipliers will be 1/r)

8
Approximate solution for knapsack (gap 2)
  • 2rxe copies of edge e, sorted by capacity
  • Place in r buckets, round robin
  • No edge in any solution twice

9
All buckets are Feasible
ek4 ek2 e1
lt
ek3 ek1
lt
First Bucket (biggest)
Last Bucket (smallest)
10
All Buckets Feasible
  • Suppose
  • We have
  • So
    for all buckets
  • From total capacity
  • Contradicts KC inequality

11
Separation
  • Only have to satisfy KC inequality for
  • Add these cuts if violated till we get an LP
    solution where KC inequality holds for its A.

12
Polynomial Time
  • Really only m1 distinct solutions

13
A Scheduling Example
  • Given n jobs J1, J2, , Jn
  • Job Ji has length pi, weight wi
  • Precedence constraints mean Ji
    must finish before Jj starts
  • No preemption, one machine
  • Cj completion time of job Jj
  • Goal minimize
  • NP-complete. Well get a 4-approximation

14
Integer Programming Formulation
  • Subject to

15
Constraint One Job at a Time
T-pj
t
t-1
t1
t2
tpj-1
...
t-1
  • Consider all (job, finish time) pairs that would
    run over (t-1, t

16
Precedence Constraints
  • If job Jk finishes by time t pk, then job Jj
    must finish by time t

17
LP relaxation, Fractional Schedule
xjt
pj
18
Fractional Schedule x
  • Fractional Completion Time
  • Midpoint min t such that

19
Approximation Algorithm
  • Solve LP
  • Compute midpoints for all jobs
  • Order by midpoints

20
Approximate Schedule is feasible
  • No preemption
  • One job at a time
  • Precedence constraints
  • Midpoint of Jj lt Midpoint of Jk

21
Proof of Quality Road Map
  • Relate Cj to LP values
  • Renumber jobs by midpoint
  • Well show

22
Upper Bound on Completion Times
t
t-pj
  • At time tj fractional schedule has done pj/2
    work.
  • Since tk? tj for kltj, schedule has done pk/2
    work on Jk.
  • One unit of work/time unit ?
  • But by construction

xjt
23
Lower Bound on LP values
  • By definition
  • So

24
Proof of Quality
  • Therefore

25
Comments
  • Can create alternative schedules using ? point
    tj?
  • LP-based approximation algorithms can give
    feasible solutions in branch and bound
  • Other LP-based approximation algorithms for
    scheduling problems are based on
    matching/assignment

26
Appendix
27
General Graphs
  • Let
  • Solutions one bucket from each multiedge

. . .
28
Analysis for General Graphs
  • Consider cut C and
  • For each edge, maximum uA capacity difference is
    D(Ac).
  • Cut from at most ?(G) multiedges (combination of
    buckets), so maximum capacity difference between
    solutions is ?(G) D(Ac).
  • By similar arguments, KC cut would be violated if
    any cut were infeasible.

29
General Graphs - separation
  • Check smallest bucket for feasibility (meeting
    all demand pairs)
  • If cut C violated, add KC inequality
  • Dont know ?(G)
  • Run binary search with full algorithm

30
Some Additional Results
  • Everything holds if edge e can be chosen b(e)
    times
  • Series-parallel graphs have integrality gap
  • Capacitated cover bound max nonzeros in any row
  • FPTAS for outerplanar graphs with one demand pair
  • FPTAS to find approximately most violated KC
    inequality.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com