Document Open Access Logo

Random Sampling with Removal

Authors Bernd Gärtner, Johannes Lengler, May Szedlák



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.SoCG.2016.40.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.51 MB
  • 16 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Bernd Gärtner
Johannes Lengler
May Szedlák

Cite AsGet BibTex

Bernd Gärtner, Johannes Lengler, and May Szedlák. Random Sampling with Removal. In 32nd International Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 51, pp. 40:1-40:16, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.SoCG.2016.40

Abstract

Random sampling is a classical tool in constrained optimization. Under favorable conditions, the optimal solution subject to a small subset of randomly chosen constraints violates only a small subset of the remaining constraints. Here we study the following variant that we call random sampling with removal: suppose that after sampling the subset, we remove a fixed number of constraints from the sample, according to an arbitrary rule. Is it still true that the optimal solution of the reduced sample violates only a small subset of the constraints? The question naturally comes up in situations where the solution subject to the sampled constraints is used as an approximate solution to the original problem. In this case, it makes sense to improve cost and volatility of the sample solution by removing some of the constraints that appear most restricting. At the same time, the approximation quality (measured in terms of violated constraints) should remain high. We study random sampling with removal in a generalized, completely abstract setting where we assign to each subset R of the constraints an arbitrary set V(R) of constraints disjoint from R; in applications, V(R) corresponds to the constraints violated by the optimal solution subject to only the constraints in R. Furthermore, our results are parametrized by the dimension d, i.e., we assume that every set R has a subset B of size at most d with the same set of violated constraints. This is the first time this generalized setting is studied. In this setting, we prove matching upper and lower bounds for the expected number of constraints violated by a random sample, after the removal of k elements. For a large range of values of k, the new upper bounds improve the previously best bounds for LP-type problems, which moreover had only been known in special cases. We show that this bound on special LP-type problems, can be derived in the much more general setting of violator spaces, and with very elementary proofs.
Keywords
  • LP-type problem
  • violator space
  • random sampling
  • sampling with removal

Metrics

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

References

  1. Y. Brise and B. Gärtner. Clarkson’s algorithm for violator spaces. Computational Geometry, 44(2):70-81, 2011. Special issue of selected papers from the 21st Annual Canadian Conference on Computational Geometry. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comgeo.2010.09.003.
  2. M. C. Campi and S. Garatti. The exact feasibility of randomized solutions of uncertain convex programs. SIAM J. Optim., 19:1211-1230, 2008. Google Scholar
  3. M. C. Campi and S. Garatti. A sampling-and-discarding approach to chance-constrained optimization: feasibility and optimality. J. Optim. Theory Appl., 148:257-280, 2011. Google Scholar
  4. T. H. Cormen, C. E. Leiserson, and R. L. Rivest. Introduction to Algorithms. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA., 1990. Google Scholar
  5. B. Gärtner. Sampling with removal in LP-type problems. Journal of Computational Geometry, 6(2):93-112, 2015. Google Scholar
  6. B. Gärtner, J. Matoušek, L. Rüst, and P. Škovroň. Violator spaces: Structure and algorithms. Discrete Appl. Math., 156(11):2124-2141, June 2008. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2007.08.048.
  7. B. Gärtner, W. D. Morris, Jr., and L. Rüst. Unique sink orientations of grids. In Proc. 11th Conference on Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization (IPCO), volume 3509 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 210-224. Springer-Verlag, 2005. Google Scholar
  8. B. Gärtner and E. Welzl. A simple sampling lemma: Analysis and applications in geometric optimization. Discrete &Computational Geometry, 25(4):569-590, 2001. Google Scholar
  9. J. Matoušek, M. Sharir, and E. Welzl. A subexponential bound for linear programming. Algorithmica, 16:498-516, 1996. Google Scholar
  10. J. Matoušek. Removing degeneracy in LP-type problems revisited. Discrete &Computational Geometry, 42(4):517-526, 2009. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00454-008-9085-7.
  11. M. Sharir and E. Welzl. A combinatorial bound for linear programming and related problems. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, STACS'92, pages 569-579, London, UK, UK, 1992. Springer-Verlag. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-55210-3_213.
  12. T. Szabó and E. Welzl. Unique sink orientations of cubes. In Proc. 42nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 547-555, 2000. Google Scholar
  13. E. Welzl. Smallest enclosing disks (balls and ellipsoids). In Results and New Trends in Computer Science, pages 359-370. Springer-Verlag, 1991. Google Scholar
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