Online Flow Time Minimization: Tight Bounds for Non-Preemptive Algorithms
November 05, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· π arXiv.org
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Yutong Geng, Enze Sun, Zonghan Yang, Yuhao Zhang
arXiv ID
2511.03485
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
0
Venue
arXiv.org
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
This paper studies the classical online scheduling problem of minimizing total flow time for $n$ jobs on $m$ identical machines. Prior work often cites the $Ξ©(n)$ lower bound for non-preemptive algorithms to argue for the necessity of preemption or resource augmentation, which shows the trivial $O(n)$-competitive greedy algorithm is tight. However, this lower bound applies only to \emph{deterministic} algorithms in the \emph{single-machine} case, leaving several fundamental questions unanswered. Can randomness help in the non-preemptive setting, and what is the optimal online deterministic algorithm when $m \geq 2$? We resolve both questions. We present a polynomial-time randomized algorithm with competitive ratio $Ξ(\sqrt{n/m})$ and prove a matching randomized lower bound, settling the randomized non-preemptive setting for every $m$. This also improves the best-known offline approximation ratio from $O(\sqrt{n/m}\log(n/m))$ to $O(\sqrt{n/m})$. On the deterministic side, we present a non-preemptive algorithm with competitive ratio $O(n/m^{2}+\sqrt{n/m}\log m)$ and prove a nearly matching lower bound. Our framework also extends to the kill-and-restart model, where we reveal a sharp transition of deterministic algorithms: we design an asymptotically optimal algorithm with the competitive ratio $O(\sqrt{n/m})$ for $m\ge 2$, yet establish a strong $Ξ©(n/\log n)$ lower bound for $m=1$. Moreover, we show that randomization provides no further advantage, as the lower bound coincides with that of the non-preemptive setting. While our main results assume prior knowledge of $n$, we also investigate the setting where $n$ is unknown. We show kill-and-restart is powerful enough to break the $O(n)$ barrier for $m \geq 2$ even without knowing $n$. Conversely, we prove randomization alone is insufficient, as no algorithm can achieve an $o(n)$ competitive ratio in this setting.
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