arxiv: v1 [cs.ds] 3 Feb 2014

Transcription

1 arxiv:40.043v [cs.ds] 3 Feb 04 A Bound on the Expected Optiality of Rando Feasible Solutions to Cobinatorial Optiization Probles Evan A. Sultani The Johns Hopins University APL evan@sultani.co February 4, 04 Abstract This paper investigates and bounds the expected solution quality of cobinatorial optiization probles when feasible solutions are chosen at rando. Loose general bounds are discovered, as well as failies of cobinatorial optiization probles for which rando feasible solutions are expected to be a constant factor of optial. One iplication of this result is that, for graphical probles, if the average edge weight in a feasible solution is sufficiently sall, then any randoly chosen feasible solution to the proble will be a constant factor of optial. For exaple, under certain well-defined circustances, the expected constant of approxiation of a randoly chosen feasible solution to the Steiner networ proble is bounded above by 3. Epirical analysis supports these bounds and actually suggest that they ight be tightened. Introduction Cobinatorial optiization is the process of selecting a set of points fro a finite topological space that axiize or iniize a given objective function. It is often very siple to find feasible solutions to such probles, however, it is usually exceedingly hard to find optial ones. For exaple, given a finite set of objects y Y each with value v : Y R and weight w : Y R 0, the napsac proble ass to find a subset of the objects S Y whose cobined weight does not exceed a given axiu, w ax, and whose cobined value is Evan is no longer affiliated with Johns Hopins University. He is currently the chief scientist at Digital Operatives and adjunct faculty at the Drexel University Departent of Coputer Science.

2 axiized: axiize y Y v(y)x y subject to: w(y)x y w ax, y Y x y {0, }, y Y, where the chosen set of objects is S = {y Y : x y = }. Finding a feasible solution to the napsac proble is trivial: Any set of objects S Y that does not outweigh the axiu, v(s) w ax, s S will be a feasible solution. Such a set of objects can be chosen in linear tie. As a second exaple, consider another NP-Coplete proble: the Steiner networ proble []. Given an undirected, edge-weighted graph on n vertices and edges, G = V, E, and also given a subset of terinal vertices T V of cardinality α = T, the Steiner networ proble ass to find a iniu weight forest that spans the terinals []: iniize e E w(e)x e subject to: e δ(s) x e f(s), S V : S x e 0, e E, where δ(s) is the set of edges having exactly one endpoint in S and f : V {0, } is a function such that f(s) = if and only if S T T. Despite the fact that finding an optial solution is hard, finding a feasible solution is not: Any spanning forest will be a feasible solution to the Steiner networ proble. Given that finding a feasible solution is often so siple relative to finding the optial, we would lie to now: In expectation, how uch worse is a given feasible certificate copared to the optial solution? This paper investigates and bounds the expected solution quality to such probles when feasible solutions are chosen at rando. We proceed by bounding the expected value of the best- and worst-case outcoes of any choice of objects. In general, let be a lower bound on the nuber of objects in an optial solution. In the case of the Steiner networ proble, for exaple, ust be greater than or equal to α edges. Let l be an upper bound on the nuber of objects chosen by a given algorith that is guaranteed to produce feasible but not necessarily optial solutions. In the worst case, the algorith will have chosen the l costliest objects while the

3 optial solution actually contained the cheapest objects. How liely is this outcoe? If we can bound the ratio of the expected value of the su of the l costliest objects over the expected value of the su of the cheapest objects, this will be an upper bound on the expected constant of approxiation of the algorith, regardless of how the algorith actually chooses a feasible solution, and also regardless of which cobinatorial optiization proble we are solving. The bound on the expected constant of approxiation is codified in the reainder of this paper. Section serves to foralize the proble and Section 3 develops the bound, the theoretical consequences of which are discussed in Section 4. The theoretical bound is supported through epirical evaluation in Section 5. Proofs of the various leas and theores are provided at the end of the paper in A. Fraing the Proble It is often useful to thin of cobinatorial optiization as the process of selecting an optial subset fro a given finite set of objects. We proceed by treating the cost of each object in a cobinatorial optiization proble as a rando variable. Let X = [X,..., X ] be a vector rando variable consisting of identically distributed (but not necessarily independent) rando variables. In a sense, each variable captures whether or not one of the objects fro the cobinatorial optiization proble will be chosen to be a part of the solution. In the napsac proble, for exaple, is the total nuber of objects. In the Steiner networ proble, is the nuber of edges in the graph. The order statistics of X are denoted X (:)... X (r:)... X (:). For l {,,..., }, let Y be the distribution of the l largest order statistics of X: Y r= l+ X (r:). Siilarly, for {,,..., }, let Y be the su of the sallest order statistics of X: Y X (r:). r= Without loss of generality, we assue in the reainder of our analysis that the objective function is being iniized. In that case, observe that Y is the probability distribution of the cost of the costliest solution of size l and, siilarly, Y is the distribution of the cost of the best possible solution of size. The expected value of Y will be an upper bound on the expected value of the costliest solution to the proble, whereas the expected value of Y will be a lower bound on the expected value of the optial solution. We are interested in answering the question: What can be said of the relationship between Y and Y? If Y and Y are nonnegative then the expected i.e., their distributions are truncated such that the probability density for all negative values is zero. 3

4 value of Y/Y will be an upper bound on the expected constant of approxiation of any algorith that produces feasible solutions to the optiization proble. In general, for arbitrary Y and Y, the expected approxiation factor is bounded above by + E[Y ]. () We develop an upper bound on this expression in the following section. 3 Bounds on Order Statistics Gascuel and Caraux discovered the following bounds on the expected value of order statistics of rando variables with syetrical distributions with ean µ and variance σ : Theore (Proposition of [3]). The bounds if r, µ σ r if r, µ σ ( r) E[X µ + σ (r:)] µ + σ r ( r+) (r ) ( r+) if r, if r, are valid and ay be reached for soe distributions. With the result of Theore and soe interediary bounds on the generalized haronic series, we are led directly to a loose lower bound for E[Y ] and a loose upper bound for E[Y ]. To achieve these bounds, let us first constrain the agnitude of and l with respect to : l. These constraints appear to be reasonable: The faily of cobinatorial optiization probles that confor to these constraints is large. In the context of the Steiner networ proble, for exaple, these constraints equate to requiring that both the optial and feasible solutions encopass fewer than half of all possible edges in the graph. This assuption clearly holds for alost every siple graph since. such graphs have ( n ) = n(n ) possible edges;. any feasible solution to the Steiner networ proble will have at ost n edges; and 3. n 4 : n n 4 (n ). The constraints on the agnitude of and l lead to the following loose bounds: 4

5 Theore (Proof of this and the reainder of the theores in this paper are given in A). Theore 3. = E[Y ] > µ σ ( + ). l = E[Y ] lµ + σ ( ) l. It is possible to bound the expected approxiation factor of Equation () by utilizing the bounds on E[Y ] and E[Y ]: Theore 4. If (l ) and then lµ µ + 3σ, if µ < σ + + σ µ E[Y ] lµ + σ µ σ, if µ > σ +, which siplifies to, if µ < σ + 3, if µ 0 4, if µ(l + ) σ ε R, if µ σ(ε 3) l +ε < σ + ε R, if σ + < µ σ(ε ) l. (lµ σ µ > σ) Corollary. If l > exp ( + 3 ) µ > σ + l, then the upper bound siplifies to 3. Corollary. If σ µ, the constant bound of 3 will hold asyptotically. 4 Discussion Theore 4 is a rather surprising result: If we now that the size of the optial solution is bounded below by and the average edge weight in a rando feasible solution is sall, then any randoly chosen solution of size at ost l will, on average, be a constant factor of optial. If the edges are weighted fro a distribution with a nonpositive ean, then any randoly chosen feasible solution of any size is guaranteed to be, on average, no ore than three ties the cost of the optial solution. 5

6 Consider the Steiner networ proble as an exaple. If there are α terinals then we now that the optial solution ust have at least α edges (this is ). Any feasible solution to the proble is going to be an acyclic graph, which will have at ost n edges (this is l). The nuber of rando variables,, is equal to the nuber of edges, which is bounded above by ( ) n. If µ is sall then, by Theore 4, the expected constant of approxiation for any randoly chosen feasible solution to the Steiner networ proble is bounded above by µ(n ) + 3σ ( n ) µ α σ ( n ) µ α, which quicly 3 converges to 3 as n. 5 Epirical Evidence In order to deonstrate the validity and tightness of the bound, we epirically evaluate the optiality of randoly chosen feasible solutions to cobinatorial optiization probles. First, let us consider a relatively siple proble that is in P: iniu spanning tree. We will later also exaine the NP-Coplete Steiner networ proble. Rando graphs are generated using the Erdős-Rényi odel G(n, ) with n {4,..., 30} vertices and {3,..., ( n ) } edges. The edges of the rando graphs are weighted according to various probability distributions (listed in the forthcoing figures, below). A rando feasible solution is chosen by solving the iniu spanning tree proble on the graph while ignoring edge weights. While this will in effect produce a rando feasible solution that is independent of the edge weights (and therefore also the optiization proble s objective function), note that this ethod is not equivalent to drawing uniforly fro the set of all possible feasible solutions. As such, these results ay slightly bias the rando solutions optiality. The optial solution is discovered by solving the proble taing edge weights into account. The constant of approxiation is then calculated by taing the ratio of the cost of the rando feasible solution over the cost of the optial solution. As we can see in Figure, the randoly chosen solutions rapidly converge to an approxiation constant of. Next, let us consider the Steiner networ proble. The rando graphs are generated siilarly to the iniu spanning tree case above. The nuber of terinals in the proble is set to n and the terinals are chosen randoly fro the vertices according to a unifor distribution. The rando feasible solutions are chosen by solving the iniu spanning tree proble on the graph. Since the Steiner networ proble is coputationally intractable to solve optially, though, we are forced to copare the randoly chosen feasible solutions against a bounded approxiation to the optial solution using a - Optial algorith []. Therefore, if the rando feasible solutions have a cost no i.e., the first case of the piecewise bound of Theore 4 is satisfied. 3 Convergence is superlinear, as confired by d Alebert s ratio test. 6

7 Mean Constant of Approxiation Gaussian(0,) Unifor (-0.5,0.5) Laplace Logistic Gaussian(0,000) Gubel Nuber of Edges Figure : The average constant of approxiation of randoly chosen feasible solutions to the iniu spanning tree proble converges to. 7

8 Ratio of Rando Solution Cost over -OPT Solution Cost Nuber of Edges Gaussian(0,) Unifor(0,) Gubel Laplace Logistic Figure : Rando feasible solutions to the Steiner networ proble copared to a -OPT algorith. Values less than iply that the rando solution was lower cost than the approxiation algorith s solution. worse than the approxiation algoriths, we now that the cost of the feasible solutions are no ore than twice the cost of the optial solution. As we see in Figure, for alost all graphs the randoly chosen solutions actually perfor better than the approxiation algorith, with iproveent as the graphs get denser. 6 Conclusions This paper investigated and bounded the expected solution quality of cobinatorial optiization probles when feasible solutions are chosen at rando. A loose general bound was discovered (Theore 4), as well as failies of cobinatorial optiization probles for which rando feasible solutions are expected to be a constant factor of optial. One iplication of this result is that, for graphical probles, if the average edge weight in a feasible solution is sufficiently sall, then any randoly chosen feasible solution to the proble will be a constant factor of optial. For exaple, under certain well-defined circustances, the expected constant of approxiation of a randoly chosen feasible solution to the Steiner networ proble is bounded above by 3. Epirical analysis supports these bounds and actually suggest that they ight be tightened. 8

9 Acnowledgeents This research was perfored under The Johns Hopins University Applied Physics Laboratory research grant X9RSTHNA and the Stuart S. Janney award. Thans are owed to Kevin Schultz and Ali Shooufandeh for their helpful coents and insight. A Proofs and Suppleentary Theores Let H n,r denote the generalized haronic nuber of order n of r: Lea. H n,r = n i= i r. n + < H n, n. Proof. Since x is onotonically decreasing in x, we can bound H n, by its definite integral using the forward and bacward rectangle rules. For the lower bound, For the upper bound, H n, H n, = > n i i= n+ x dx = n +. = + + n i= n = n. i x dx Proof of Theore. The conditions of the iplication in the theore ensure that the bounds of Theore siplify to E[X (r:) ] µ σ r. Applying this bound to the tried su of the sallest order statistics results in µ σ r. r= 9

10 Further siplification yields µ σ By Lea, () is bounded below by r= µ σ ( + ). r. () Proof of Theore 3. The conditions of the iplication in the theore ensure that the bounds of Theore siplify to E[X (r:) ] µ + σ ( r + ). Applying this bound to the tried su of the l largest order statistics results in lµ + σ r +. Further siplification yields r= l+ lµ + σ r= l+ The suation in (3) is equal to H l, : r +. (3) r= l+ r + = = l + l + l l i= i = H l,, which, by Lea, is bounded above by l. Proof of Theore 4. Let E[Y ] be the upper bound of Theore 3 and E[Y ] be the lower bound of Theore. Note that + E[Y ] + E[Y ], 0

11 allowing us to proceed by bounding the expression using E[Y ] and E[Y ]. Next, observe that E[Y ] E[Y ], so the absolute value in the nuerator can be dropped: + E[Y ] + E[Y. ] There are therefore two cases to consider, depending on the sign of the denoinator. Let us first consider the case when E[Y ] < 0. Since,, and σ are necessarily positive, observe that E[Y ] < 0 µ < σ +, producing the first case in the piecewise function of the theore. Under these circustances, evaluating Equation yields + E[Y ] + E[Y ] Since = σ ( + ) σ and = l, = σ the bound can be relaxed to (4) lµ µ + σ ( l σ ( + ) µ ( ) l , lµ µ + 3σ. σ µ In the second and final case, E[Y ] > 0 and + E[Y ] + E[Y ] lµ + σ ( l = ) µ σ ( + ) ). (4) lµ + σ µ σ, because (l ), iplies ( l+ + 5 ) and ( + ).

12 Proof of Corollary. Evaluating the expression yields lµ + σ ( + log l) µ + σ ( + ) l µ + σ (log l + ) l log l + l µ + σ ( + ) ( + ) l exp( + 3), which is satisfied by the conditions of the corollary. Proof of Corollary. Fro Theore 4, σ µ = + E[Y ] lµ µ + 3σ σ µ = Θ(3). References [] M. X. Goeans, A. V. Goldberg, S. Plotin, D. B. Shoys, E. Tardos, D. P. Williason, Iproved approxiation algoriths for networ design probles, in: Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM-SIAM Syposiu on Discrete Algoriths, 994, pp [] M. Aggarwal, N. Garg, A Scaling Technique for Better Networ Design, in: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM-SIAM Syposiu on Discrete Algoriths, Society for Industrial and Applied Matheatics, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 994, pp [3] O. Gascuel, G. Caraux, Bounds on expectations of order statistics via extreal dependences, Statistics & Probability Letters 5 () (99)