Naively Sorting Evolving Data is Optimal and Robust
April 11, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· π IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
George Giakkoupis, Marcos Kiwi, Dimitrios Los
arXiv ID
2404.08162
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
0
Venue
IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
Last Checked
5 months ago
Abstract
We study sorting in the evolving data model, introduced by [AKMU11], where the true total order changes while the sorting algorithm is processing the input. More precisely, each comparison operation of the algorithm is followed by a sequence of evolution steps, where an evolution step perturbs the rank of a random item by a "small" random value. The goal is to maintain an ordering that remains close to the true order over time. Previous works have analyzed adaptations of classic sorting algorithms, assuming that an evolution step changes the rank of an item by just one, and that a fixed constant number $b$ of evolution steps take place between two comparisons. In fact, the only previous result achieving optimal linear total deviation, by [BvDEGJ18a], applies just for $b=1$. We analyze a very simple sorting algorithm suggested by [M14], which samples a random pair of adjacent items in each step and swaps them if they are out of order. We show that the algorithm achieves and maintains, with high probability, optimal total deviation, $O(n)$, and optimal maximum deviation, $O(\log n)$, under very general model settings. Namely, the perturbation introduced by each evolution step is sampled from a general distribution of bounded moment generating function, and we just require that the average number of evolution steps between two sorting steps be bounded by an (arbitrary) constant, where the average is over a linear number of steps. The key ingredients of our proof are a novel potential function argument that inserts "gaps" in the list of items, and a general analysis framework which separates the analysis of sorting from that of the evolution steps, and is applicable to a variety of settings for which previous approaches do not apply. Our results settle conjectures and open problems in the aforementioned works, and provide theoretical support for empirical observations in [BvDEGJ18b].
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