Document Open Access Logo

Online Packing of Orthogonal Polygons

Authors Tim Gerlach , Benjamin Hennies, Linda Kleist

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.SoCG.2026.52.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.09 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Related Versions

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Computational geometry
Keywords
  • Packing
  • orthogonal polygon
  • algorithm
  • offline
  • online
  • competitive ratio
  • bin packing
  • strip packing
  • perimeter packing
  • critical density
  • 6-gon
  • 8-gon
  • L-shape
  • Z-shape
  • skeleton

Metrics

Abstract

While rectangular and box-shaped objects dominate the classic discourse of theoretic investigations, a fascinating frontier lies in packing more complex shapes. Given recent insights that convex polygons do not allow for constant competitive online algorithms for diverse variants under translation, we study orthogonal polygons, in particular of small complexity. For translational packings of orthogonal 6-gons, we show that the competitive ratio of any online algorithm that aims to pack the items into a minimal number of unit bins is in Ω(n/(log n)), where n denotes the number of objects. In contrast, we show that constant competitive algorithms exist when the orthogonal 6-gons are symmetric or small. For (orthogonally convex) orthogonal 8-gons, we show that the trivial n-competitive algorithm, which places each item in its own bin, is best-possible, i.e., every online algorithm has an asymptotic competitive ratio of at least n. This implies that for general orthogonal polygons, the trivial algorithm is best possible.
Interestingly, for packing degenerate orthogonal polygons (with thickness 0), called skeletons, the change in complexity is even more drastic. While constant competitive algorithms for 6-skeletons exist, no online algorithm for 8-skeletons achieves a competitive ratio better than n.
For other packing variants of orthogonal 6-gons under translation, our insights imply the following consequences. The asymptotic competitive ratio of any online algorithm is in Ω(n/(log n)) for strip packing, and there exist online algorithms with competitive ratios in O(1) for perimeter packing, or in O(√n) for minimizing the area of the bounding box. Moreover, the critical packing density is positive (if every object individually fits into the interior of a unit bin).

Cite As Get BibTex

Tim Gerlach, Benjamin Hennies, and Linda Kleist. Online Packing of Orthogonal Polygons. In 42nd International Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG 2026). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 367, pp. 52:1-52:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2026) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.SoCG.2026.52

Author Details

Tim Gerlach
  • Universität Hamburg, Germany
Benjamin Hennies
  • Technische Universität Braunschweig, Germany
Linda Kleist
  • Universität Hamburg, Germany

Acknowledgements

We thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, which helped to improve the quality of this work. In particular, we thank an anonymous reviewer for the suggestion to use NextFit in the proof of Theorem 6(i) and improving the analysis to obtain a competitive ratio of 2.

References

  1. Anders Aamand, Mikkel Abrahamsen, Lorenzo Beretta, and Linda Kleist. Online sorting and translational packing of convex polygons. In Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA 2023), pages 1806-1833. SIAM, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611977554.ch69.
  2. Mikkel Abrahamsen, Ioana O. Bercea, Lorenzo Beretta, Jonas Klausen, and László Kozma. Online Sorting and Online TSP: Randomized, Stochastic, and High-Dimensional. In European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA 2024), volume 308 of LIPIcs, pages 5:1-5:15, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ESA.2024.5.
  3. Mikkel Abrahamsen and Lorenzo Beretta. Online Packing to Minimize Area or Perimeter. In 37th International Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG 2021), pages 6:1-6:15, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.SoCG.2021.6.
  4. Mikkel Abrahamsen, Tillmann Miltzow, and Nadja Seiferth. Framework for ∃ℝ-completeness of two-dimensional packing problems. TheoretiCS, 3, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.46298/theoretics.24.11.
  5. Helmut Alt. Computational aspects of packing problems. Bulletin of the EATCS, 118, 2016. URL: http://eatcs.org/beatcs/index.php/beatcs/article/view/390.
  6. Helmut Alt, Otfried Cheong, Ji-won Park, and Nadja Scharf. Packing 2D disks into a 3D container. In International Workshop on Algorithms and Computation (WALCOM 2019), pages 369-380, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10564-8_29.
  7. Helmut Alt, Mark de Berg, and Christian Knauer. Approximating minimum-area rectangular and convex containers for packing convex polygons. Journal of Computational Geometry, 8(1):1-10, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.20382/jocg.v8i1a1.
  8. Helmut Alt, Mark de Berg, and Christian Knauer. Corrigendum to: Approximating minimum-area rectangular and convex containers for packing convex polygons. Journal of Computational Geometry, 11(1):653-655, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.20382/jocg.v11i1a26.
  9. Yossi Azar, Debmalya Panigrahi, and Or Vardi. Nearly tight bounds for the online sorting problem. CoRR, abs/2508.14287, 2025. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2508.14287.
  10. Brenda S. Baker and Jerald S. Schwarz. Shelf algorithms for two-dimensional packing problems. SIAM Journal on Computing, 12(3):508-525, 1983. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/0212033.
  11. János Balogh, József Békési, György Dósa, Leah Epstein, and Asaf Levin. Lower bounds for several online variants of bin packing. Theory of Computing Systems, 63:1757-1780, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00224-019-09915-1.
  12. János Balogh, József Békési, György Dósa, Leah Epstein, and Asaf Levin. A new lower bound for classic online bin packing. Algorithmica, 83:2047-2062, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-021-00818-7.
  13. János Balogh, Leah Epstein, and Asaf Levin. More on ordered open end bin packing, 2020. Google Scholar
  14. Nikhil Bansal and Arindam Khan. Improved approximation algorithm for two-dimensional bin packing. In Symposium on discrete algorithms (SODA 2014), pages 13-25. SIAM, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611973402.2.
  15. Nikhil Bansal, Tracy Kimbrel, and Kirk Pruhs. Speed scaling to manage energy and temperature. Journal of the ACM, 54(1):1-39, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1206035.120603.
  16. Brian Brubach. Improved bound for online square-into-square packing. In International Workshop on Approximation and Online Algorithms (WAOA 2014), pages 47-58, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18263-6_5.
  17. Lin Chen, Nicole Megow, and Kevin Schewior. The Power of Migration in Online Machine Minimization. In Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms (SPAA 2016) and Architectures, pages 175-184, Pacific Grove California USA, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2935764.2935786.
  18. Lin Chen, Nicole Megow, and Kevin Schewior. An O(log m)-Competitive Algorithm for Online Machine Minimization. SIAM Journal on Computing, 47(6):2057-2077, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/17M116032X.
  19. Henrik I. Christensen, Arindam Khan, Sebastian Pokutta, and Prasad Tetali. Approximation and online algorithms for multidimensional bin packing: A survey. Computer Science Review, 24:63-79, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2016.12.001.
  20. Don Coppersmith and Prabhakar Raghavan. Multidimensional On-Line Bin Packing: Algorithms and Worst-Case Analysis. Operations Research Letters, 8(1), 1989. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6377(89)90027-8.
  21. János Csirik and Gerhard J. Woeginger. On-line packing and covering problems. In Amos Fiat and Gerhard J. Woeginger, editors, Online Algorithms: The State of the Art, pages 147-177. Springer, 1998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0029568.
  22. Nikhil Devanur, Konstantin Makarychev, Debmalya Panigrahi, and Grigory Yaroslavtsev. Online Algorithms for Machine Minimization, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1403.0486.
  23. Leah Epstein. A lower bound for online rectangle packing. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 38:846-866, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10878-019-00423-z.
  24. Leah Epstein. Open-end bin packing: new and old analysis approaches. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 321:220-239, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2022.07.003.
  25. Leah Epstein and Loay Mualem. Online bin packing of squares and cubes. Algorithmica, 85(5):1415-1458, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S00453-022-01078-9.
  26. Leah Epstein and Rob van Stee. Multidimensional packing problems. In Teofilo F. Gonzalez, editor, Handbook of Approximation Algorithms and Metaheuristics, pages 553-570. Chapman and Hall/CRC, second edition, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781351236423-31.
  27. Sándor P. Fekete and Hella-Franziska Hoffmann. Online square-into-square packing. Algorithmica, 77(3):867-901, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-016-0114-2.
  28. Robert Fowler, Michael Paterson, and Steven 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.
  29. Gábor Galambos. A 1.6 lower-bound for the two-dimensional on-line rectange bin-packing. Acta Cybernetica, 10(1-2):21-24, January 1991. URL: https://cyber.bibl.u-szeged.hu/index.php/actcybern/article/ view/3389.
  30. Tim Gerlach, Benhamin Hennies, and Linda Kleist. Online packing of orthogonal polygons, 2026. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.22098.
  31. Xin Han, Francis Y. L. Chin, Hing-Fung Ting, Guochuan Zhang, and Yong Zhang. A new upper bound 2.5545 on 2d online bin packing. ACM Transactions on Algorithms, 7(4):50:1-50:18, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2000807.2000818.
  32. Xin Han, Kazuo Iwama, Deshi Ye, and Guochuan Zhang. Strip packing vs. bin packing. In Algorithmic Aspects in Information and Management (AAIM 2007), pages 358-367, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72870-2_34.
  33. Xin Han, Kazuo Iwama, and Guochuan Zhang. Online removable square packing. Theory of Computing Systems, 43(1):38-55, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00224-007-9039-0.
  34. Rolf Harren, Klaus Jansen, Lars Prädel, Ulrich M. Schwarz, and Rob van Stee. Two for one: Tight approximation of 2D bin packing. International Journal of Foundations of Computer Science, 24(8):1299-1328, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129054113500354.
  35. Rolf Harren, Klaus Jansen, Lars Prädel, and Rob Van Stee. A (5/3+ε)-approximation for strip packing. Computational Geometry, 47(2):248-267, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comgeo.2013.08.008.
  36. Sungjin Im, Benjamin Moseley, Kirk Pruhs, and Clifford Stein. An O(log log m)-Competitive Algorithm for Online Machine Minimization, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1708.09046.
  37. Janusz Januszewski and Marek Lassak. On-line packing sequences of cubes in the unit cube. Geometriae Dedicata, 67(3):285-293, 1997. URL: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004953109743.
  38. Mong-Jen Kao, Jian-Jia Chen, Ignaz Rutter, and Dorothea Wagner. Competitive design and analysis for machine-minimizing job scheduling problem. In International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation, pages 75-84, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35261-4_11.
  39. Henry A. Kierstead and William T. Trotter. An extremal problem in recursive combinatorics. Congressus Numerantium, 33(143-153):98, 1981. Google Scholar
  40. A. Kosiński. A proof of an Auerbach-Banach-Mazur-Ulam theorem on convex bodies. Colloquium Mathematicae, 4(2):216-218, 1957. URL: https://doi.org/10.4064/cm-4-2-216-218.
  41. Adam Kurpisz and Silvan Suter. Improved Approximations for Translational Packing of Convex Polygons. In European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA 2023), volume 274 of LIPIcs, pages 76:1-76:14, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ESA.2023.76.
  42. Marek Lassak and Jixian Zhang. An on-line potato-sack theorem. Discrete & Computational Geometry, 6(1):1-7, 1991. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02574670.
  43. Joseph Leung, Tommy Tam, Chin Wong, Gilbert Young, and Francis Chin. Packing squares into a square. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 10(3):271-275, 1990. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0743-7315(90)90019-L.
  44. R. Daniel Mauldin. The scottish book: Mathematics from the scottish café, with selected problems from the new scottish book, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22897-6.
  45. Arturo I. Merino and Andreas Wiese. On the two-dimensional knapsack problem for convex polygons. In International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2020), LIPIcs, pages 84:1-84:16, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2020.84.
  46. J.W. Moon and L. Moser. Some packing and covering theorems. In Colloquium Mathematicum, volume 17, pages 103-110, 1967. URL: https://doi.org/10.4064/cm-17-1-103-110.
  47. Jubayer Nirjhor and Nicole Wein. Improved online sorting. In Approximation and Online Algorithms (WAOA 2025), pages 187-197, 2025. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-06706-7_13.
  48. Barna Saha. Renting a Cloud. In Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2013), volume 24 of LIPIcs, pages 437-448, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2013.437.
  49. Rob van Stee. SIGACT news online algorithms column 20: the power of harmony. SIGACT News, 43(2):127-136, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2261417.2261440.
  50. Rob van Stee. SIGACT news online algorithms column 26: Bin packing in multiple dimensions. SIGACT News, 46(2):105-112, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2789149.2789167.
  51. André van Vliet. An improved lower bound for on-line bin packing algorithms. Information processing letters, 43(5):277-284, 1992. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0190(92)90223-I.
  52. Deshi Ye, Xin Han, and Guochuan Zhang. A note on online strip packing. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 17(4):417-423, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10878-007-9125-x.
  53. Guosong Yu and Guochuan Zhang. Scheduling with a minimum number of machines. Operations Research Letters, 37(2):97-101, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orl.2009.01.008.
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2026 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact