Online $b$-Matching with Stochastic Rewards
November 25, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· + Add venue
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Susanne Albers, Sebastian Schubert
arXiv ID
2411.16947
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
1
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
The $b$-matching problem is an allocation problem where the vertices on the left-hand side of a bipartite graph, referred to as servers, may be matched multiple times. In the setting with stochastic rewards, an assignment between an incoming request and a server turns into a match with a given success probability. Mehta and Panigrahi (FOCS 2012) introduced online bipartite matching with stochastic rewards, where each vertex may be matched once. The framework is equally interesting in graphs with vertex capacities. In Internet advertising, for instance, the advertisers seek successful matches with a large number of users. We develop (tight) upper and lower bounds on the competitive ratio of deterministic and randomized online algorithms, for $b$-matching with stochastic rewards. Our bounds hold for both offline benchmarks considered in the literature. As in prior work, we first consider vanishing probabilities. We show that no randomized online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio greater than $1-1/e\approx 0.632$, even for identical vanishing probabilities and arbitrary uniform server capacities. Furthermore, we conduct a primal-dual analysis of the deterministic \textsc{StochasticBalance} algorithm. We prove that it achieves a competitive ratio of $1-1/e$, as server capacities increase, for arbitrary heterogeneous non-vanishing edge probabilities. This performance guarantee holds in a general setting where servers have individual capacities and for the vertex-weighted problem extension. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first result for \textsc{StochasticBalance} with arbitrary non-vanishing probabilities. We remark that our impossibility result implies in particular that, for the AdWords problem, no online algorithm can be better than $(1-1/e)$-competitive in the setting with stochastic rewards.
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