Beyond 2-approximation for k-Center in Graphs
March 12, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· π ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Ce Jin, Yael Kirkpatrick, Virginia Vassilevska Williams, Nicole Wein
arXiv ID
2503.09468
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
2
Venue
ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
We consider the classical $k$-Center problem in undirected graphs. The problem is known to have a polynomial-time 2-approximation. There are even $(2+\varepsilon)$-approximations running in near-linear time. The conventional wisdom is that the problem is closed, as $(2-\varepsilon)$-approximation is NP-hard when $k$ is part of the input, and for constant $k\geq 2$ it requires $n^{k-o(1)}$ time under SETH. Our first set of results show that one can beat the multiplicative factor of $2$ in undirected unweighted graphs if one is willing to allow additional small additive error, obtaining $(2-\varepsilon,O(1))$ approximations. We provide several algorithms that achieve such approximations for all integers $k$ with running time $O(n^{k-Ξ΄})$ for $Ξ΄>0$. For instance, for every $k\geq 2$, we obtain an $O(mn + n^{k/2+1})$ time $(2 - \frac{1}{2k-1}, 1 - \frac{1}{2k-1})$-approximation to $k$-Center. For $2$-Center we also obtain an $\tilde{O}(mn^{Ο/3})$ time $(5/3,2/3)$-approximation algorithm. Notably, the running time of this $2$-Center algorithm is faster than the time needed to compute APSP. Our second set of results are strong fine-grained lower bounds for $k$-Center. We show that our $(3/2,O(1))$-approximation algorithm is optimal, under SETH, as any $(3/2-\varepsilon,O(1))$-approximation algorithm requires $n^{k-o(1)}$ time. We also give a time/approximation trade-off: under SETH, for any integer $t\geq 1$, $n^{k/t^2-1-o(1)}$ time is needed for any $(2-1/(2t-1),O(1))$-approximation algorithm for $k$-Center. This explains why our $(2-\varepsilon,O(1))$ approximation algorithms have $k$ appearing in the exponent of the running time. Our reductions also imply that, assuming ETH, the approximation ratio 2 of the known near-linear time algorithms cannot be improved by any algorithm whose running time is a polynomial independent of $k$, even if one allows additive error.
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