<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-08-03T23:57:30Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="21016" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:21016</identifier>
        <datestamp>2024-09-16T06:02:38Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>On Instance-Optimal Algorithms for a Generalization of Nuts and Bolts and Generalized Sorting</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Goswami, Mayank</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Jacob, Riko</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Sorting</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Priced Information</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Instance Optimality</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Nuts and Bolts</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>We generalize the classical nuts and bolts problem to a setting where the input is a collection of n nuts and m bolts, and there is no promise of any matching pairs. It is not allowed to compare a nut directly with a nut or a bolt directly with a bolt, and the goal is to perform the fewest nut-bolt comparisons to discover the partial order between the nuts and bolts. We term this problem bipartite sorting.&#13;
We show that instances of bipartite sorting of the same size exhibit a wide range of complexity, and propose to perform a fine-grained analysis for this problem. We rule out straightforward notions of instance-optimality as being too stringent, and adopt a neighborhood-based definition. Our definition may be of independent interest as a unifying lens for instance-optimal algorithms for other static problems existing in literature. This includes problems like sorting (Estivill-Castro and Woods, ACM Comput. Surv. 1992), convex hull (Afshani, Barbay and Chan, JACM 2017), adaptive joins (Demaine, López-Ortiz and Munro, SODA 2000), and the recent concept of universal optimality for graphs (Haeupler, Hladík, Rozhoň, Tarjan and Tětek, 2023).&#13;
As our main result on bipartite sorting, we give a randomized algorithm that is within a factor of O(log³(n+m)) of being instance-optimal w.h.p., with respect to the neighborhood-based definition.&#13;
As our second contribution, we generalize bipartite sorting to DAG sorting, when the underlying DAG is not necessarily bipartite. As an unexpected consequence of a simple algorithm for DAG sorting, we rule out a potential lower bound on the widely-studied problem of sorting with priced information, posed by (Charikar, Fagin, Guruswami, Kleinberg, Raghavan and Sahai, STOC 2000). In this problem, comparing keys i and j has a known cost c_{ij} ∈ ℝ^+ ∪ {∞}, and the goal is to sort the keys in an instance-optimal way, by keeping the total cost of an algorithm as close as possible to ∑_{i=1}^{n-1} c_{x(i)x(i+1)}. Here x(1) &lt; ⋯ &lt; x(n) is the sorted order. While several special cases of cost functions have received a lot of attention in the community, no progress on the general version with arbitrary costs has been reported so far. One reason for this lack of progress seems to be a widely-cited Ω(n) lower bound on the competitive ratio for finding the maximum. This Ω(n) lower bound by (Gupta and Kumar, FOCS 2000) uses costs in {0,1,n, ∞}, and although not extended to sorting, this barrier seems to have stalled any progress on the general cost case. &#13;
We rule out such a potential lower bound by showing the existence of an algorithm with a Õ(n^{3/4}) competitive ratio for the {0,1,n,∞} cost version. This generalizes the setting of generalized sorting proposed by (Huang, Kannan and Khanna, FOCS 2011), where the costs are either 1 or infinity, and the cost of the cheapest proof is always n-1.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Mayank Goswami and Riko Jacob</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2024</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of LIPIcs, Volume 317, Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2024)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>InProceedings</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.APPROX/RANDOM.2024.23</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-210168</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.APPROX/RANDOM.2024.23</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
