<?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>2026-08-25T17:34:06Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="27270" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:27270</identifier>
        <datestamp>2026-08-25T13:18:20Z</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>Incremental Submodular Maximization: Better Than Greedy</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Bienkowski, Marcin</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Blikstad, Joakim</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Byrka, Jarosław</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Costa, Martín</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Disser, Yann</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Lutz, Annette</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Submodular maximization</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>incremental optimization</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>competitive analysis</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>We consider submodular maximization under increasing cardinality constraint and ask for a good incremental solution, i.e., an ordering of the ground set such that each prefix of the ordering yields a good solution for its respective cardinality. A classical result in this setting is that the greedy algorithm achieves a competitive ratio, i.e., an approximation guarantee across all cardinalities, of e/(e-1) ≈ 1.582. No better general guarantee was previously known. We present an adaptive scaling algorithm achieving a competitive ratio of 1.373. We complement our result by a lower bound of 1.25 on the best possible deterministic competitive ratio for incremental submodular maximization.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Marcin Bienkowski and Joakim Blikstad and Jarosław Byrka and Martín Costa and Yann Disser and Annette Lutz</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2026</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of LIPIcs, Volume 388, 34th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA 2026)</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.ESA.2026.134</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-272702</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ESA.2026.134</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>
