Smoothed Analysis of the k-Swap Neighborhood for Makespan Scheduling

November 26, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Lars Rohwedder, Ashkan Safari, Tjark Vredeveld arXiv ID 2411.17245 Category cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms Citations 2 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Local search is a widely used technique for tackling challenging optimization problems, offering simplicity and strong empirical performance across various problem domains. In this paper, we address the problem of scheduling a set of jobs on identical parallel machines with the objective of makespan minimization, by considering a local search neighborhood, called $k$-swap. A $k$-swap neighbor is obtained by interchanging the machine allocations of at most $k$ jobs scheduled on two machines. While local search algorithms often perform well in practice, they can exhibit poor worst-case performance. In our previous study, we showed that for $k \geq 3$, there exists an instance where the number of iterations required to converge to a local optimum is exponential in the number of jobs. Motivated by this discrepancy between theoretical worst-case bound and practical performance, we apply smoothed analysis to the $k$-swap local search. Smoothed analysis has emerged as a powerful framework for analyzing the behavior of algorithms, aiming to bridge the gap between poor worst-case and good empirical performance. In this paper, we show that the smoothed number of iterations required to find a local optimum with respect to the $k$-swap neighborhood is bounded by $O(m^2 \cdot n^{2k+2} \cdot \log m \cdot Ο†)$, where $n$ and $m$ are the numbers of jobs and machines, respectively, and $Ο†\geq 1$ is the perturbation parameter. The bound on the smoothed number of iterations demonstrates that the proposed lower bound reflects a pessimistic scenario which is rare in practice.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Data Structures & Algorithms

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted