Automated Tail Bound Analysis for Probabilistic Recurrence Relations
May 24, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· π International Conference on Computer Aided Verification
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Yican Sun, Hongfei Fu, Krishnendu Chatterjee, Amir Kafshdar Goharshady
arXiv ID
2305.15104
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
8
Venue
International Conference on Computer Aided Verification
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
Probabilistic recurrence relations (PRRs) are a standard formalism for describing the runtime of a randomized algorithm. Given a PRR and a time limit $ΞΊ$, we consider the classical concept of tail probability $\Pr[T \ge ΞΊ]$, i.e., the probability that the randomized runtime $T$ of the PRR exceeds the time limit $ΞΊ$. Our focus is the formal analysis of tail bounds that aims at finding a tight asymptotic upper bound $u \geq \Pr[T\geΞΊ]$ in the time limit $ΞΊ$. To address this problem, the classical and most well-known approach is the cookbook method by Karp (JACM 1994), while other approaches are mostly limited to deriving tail bounds of specific PRRs via involved custom analysis. In this work, we propose a novel approach for deriving exponentially-decreasing tail bounds (a common type of tail bounds) for PRRs whose preprocessing time and random passed sizes observe discrete or (piecewise) uniform distribution and whose recursive call is either a single procedure call or a divide-and-conquer. We first establish a theoretical approach via Markov's inequality, and then instantiate the theoretical approach with a template-based algorithmic approach via a refined treatment of exponentiation. Experimental evaluation shows that our algorithmic approach is capable of deriving tail bounds that are (i) asymptotically tighter than Karp's method, (ii) match the best-known manually-derived asymptotic tail bound for QuickSelect, and (iii) is only slightly worse (with a $\log\log n$ factor) than the manually-proven optimal asymptotic tail bound for QuickSort. Moreover, our algorithmic approach handles all examples (including realistic PRRs such as QuickSort, QuickSelect, DiameterComputation, etc.) in less than 0.1 seconds, showing that our approach is efficient in practice.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted