Document Open Access Logo

Online Facility Location with Weights and Congestion

Authors Arghya Chakraborty , Rahul Vaze



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2023.6.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.79 MB
  • 22 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Arghya Chakraborty
  • Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai, India
Rahul Vaze
  • Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai, India

Acknowledgements

The first author wishes to extend his deepest thanks to Prof. Umang Bhaskar, Prof. Prahladh Harsha, and Prof. Jaikumar Radhakrishnan for the thought-provoking discussions and the valuable advice they generously shared with him on multiple occasions.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Arghya Chakraborty and Rahul Vaze. Online Facility Location with Weights and Congestion. In 43rd IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 284, pp. 6:1-6:22, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2023.6

Abstract

The classic online facility location problem deals with finding the optimal set of facilities in an online fashion when demand requests arrive one at a time and facilities need to be opened to service these requests. In this work, we study two variants of the online facility location problem; (1) weighted requests and (2) congestion. Both of these variants are motivated by their applications to real life scenarios and the previously known results on online facility location cannot be directly adapted to analyse them. - Weighted requests: In this variant, each demand request is a pair (x,w) where x is the standard location of the demand while w is the corresponding weight of the request. The cost of servicing request (x,w) at facility F is w⋅ d(x,F). For this variant, given n requests, we present an online algorithm attaining a competitive ratio of 𝒪(log n) in the secretarial model for the weighted requests and show that it is optimal. -Congestion: The congestion variant considers the case when there is a congestion cost that grows with the number of requests served by each facility. For this variant, when the congestion cost is a monomial, we show that there exists an algorithm attaining a constant competitive ratio. This constant is a function of the exponent of the monomial and the facility opening cost but independent of the number of requests.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Online algorithms
Keywords
  • online algorithms
  • online facility location
  • probabilistic method
  • weighted-requests
  • congestion

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Matteo Almanza, Flavio Chierichetti, Silvio Lattanzi, Alessandro Panconesi, and Giuseppe Re. Online facility location with multiple advice. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 34, pages 4661-4673. Curran Associates, Inc., 2021. URL: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2021/file/250473494b245120a7eaf8b2e6b1f17c-Paper.pdf.
  2. Aris Anagnostopoulos, Russell Bent, Eli Upfal, and Pascal Van Hentenryck. A simple and deterministic competitive algorithm for online facility location. Inf. Comput., 194(2):175-202, 2004. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ic.2004.06.002.
  3. Sanjeev Arora, Prabhakar Raghavan, and Satish Rao. Approximation schemes for euclidean k-medians and related problems. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '98, pages 106-113, New York, NY, USA, 1998. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/276698.276718.
  4. Yossi Azar, Debmalya Panigrahi, and Noam Touitou. Online graph algorithms with predictions. In Proceedings of the 2022 Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 35-66, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611977073.3.
  5. Arghya Chakraborty and Rahul Vaze. Online facility location with timed-requests and congestion, 2022. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.11961.
  6. Moses Charikar, Liadan O'Callaghan, and Rina Panigrahy. Better streaming algorithms for clustering problems. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '03, pages 30-39, New York, NY, USA, 2003. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/780542.780548.
  7. Marek Cygan, Artur Czumaj, Marcin Mucha, and Piotr Sankowski. Online Facility Location with Deletions. In Yossi Azar, Hannah Bast, and Grzegorz Herman, editors, 26th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA 2018), volume 112 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 21:1-21:15, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2018. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ESA.2018.21.
  8. Björn Feldkord and Friedhelm Meyer auf der Heide. Online facility location with mobile facilities. In Christian Scheideler and Jeremy T. Fineman, editors, Proceedings of the 30th on Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA 2018, Vienna, Austria, July 16-18, 2018, pages 373-381. ACM, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3210377.3210389.
  9. Dimitris Fotakis. On the competitive ratio for online facility location. Algorithmica, 50(1):1-57, January 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-007-9049-y.
  10. Dimitris Fotakis. Online and incremental algorithms for facility location. SIGACT News, 42(1):97-131, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1959045.1959065.
  11. Dimitris Fotakis, Evangelia Gergatsouli, Themis Gouleakis, and Nikolas Patris. Learning augmented online facility location. (manuscript), 2021. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.08277.
  12. Robert J. Fowler, Michael S. Paterson, and Steven L. Tanimoto. Optimal packing and covering in the plane are np-complete. Information Processing Letters, 12(3):133-137, 1981. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0190(81)90111-3.
  13. Sudipto Guha, Adam Meyerson, Nina Mishra, Rajeev Motwani, and Liadan O'Callaghan. Clustering data streams: Theory and practice. IEEE Trans. on Knowl. and Data Eng., 15(3):515-528, March 2003. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2003.1198387.
  14. Kamal Jain and Vijay Vazirani. Approximation algorithms for metric facility location and k-median problems using the primal-dual schema and lagrangian relaxation. Journal of The ACM - JACM, 48, March 2001. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/375827.375845.
  15. Shaofeng H.-C. Jiang, Erzhi Liu, You Lyu, Zhihao Gavin Tang, and Yubo Zhang. Online facility location with predictions. In The Tenth International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2022, Virtual Event, April 25-29, 2022. OpenReview.net, 2022. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.08840.
  16. Haim Kaplan, David Naori, and Danny Raz. Almost tight bounds for online facility location in the random-order model. In Nikhil Bansal and Viswanath Nagarajan, editors, Proceedings of the 2023 ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2023, Florence, Italy, January 22-25, 2023, pages 1523-1544. SIAM, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611977554.ch56.
  17. Jyh-Han Lin and Jeffrey Scott Vitter. Approximation algorithms for geometric median problems. Information Processing Letters, 44(5):245-249, 1992. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0190(92)90208-D.
  18. Adam Meyerson. Online facility location. In Proceedings 42nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 426-431, 2001. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.2001.959917.
  19. Andrew Suk and Ji Zeng. A Positive Fraction Erdős-Szekeres Theorem and Its Applications. In Xavier Goaoc and Michael Kerber, editors, 38th International Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG 2022), volume 224 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 62:1-62:15, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2022. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.SoCG.2022.62.
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail