Content deleted Content added
m Various citation & identifier cleanup, plus AWB genfixes (arxiv version pointless when published) |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Add: eprint, class. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were actually parameter name changes. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here. | Suggested by Headbomb | via #UCB_toolbar |
||
Line 39:
One of the first polynomial-time algorithms for balanced assignment was the [[Hungarian algorithm]]. It is a ''global'' algorithm – it is based on improving a matching along augmenting paths (alternating paths between unmatched vertices). Its run-time complexity, when using [[Fibonacci heap]]s, is <math>O(mn + n^2\log n)</math>,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Fredman|first1=Michael L.|last2=Tarjan|first2=Robert Endre|date=1987-07-01|title=Fibonacci Heaps and Their Uses in Improved Network Optimization Algorithms|journal=J. ACM|volume=34|issue=3|pages=596–615|doi=10.1145/28869.28874|s2cid=7904683|issn=0004-5411}}</ref> where ''m'' is a number of edges. This is currently the fastest run-time of a [[strongly polynomial]] algorithm for this problem. If all weights are integers, then the run-time can be improved to <math>O(mn + n^2\log \log n)</math>, but the resulting algorithm is only weakly-polynomial.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Thorup|first=Mikkel|date=2004-11-01|title=Integer priority queues with decrease key in constant time and the single source shortest paths problem|journal=Journal of Computer and System Sciences|series=Special Issue on STOC 2003|volume=69|issue=3|pages=330–353|doi=10.1016/j.jcss.2004.04.003|issn=0022-0000}}</ref> If the weights are integers, and all weights are at most ''C'' (where ''C''>1 is some integer), then the problem can be solved in <math>O(m\sqrt{n} \log(n\cdot C))</math> weakly-polynomial time in a method called ''weight scaling''.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Gabow|first1=H.|last2=Tarjan|first2=R.|date=1989-10-01|title=Faster Scaling Algorithms for Network Problems|journal=SIAM Journal on Computing|volume=18|issue=5|pages=1013–1036|doi=10.1137/0218069|issn=0097-5397}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Goldberg|first1=A.|last2=Kennedy|first2=R.|date=1997-11-01|title=Global Price Updates Help|journal=SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics|volume=10|issue=4|pages=551–572|doi=10.1137/S0895480194281185|issn=0895-4801}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Orlin|first1=James B.|last2=Ahuja|first2=Ravindra K.|date=1992-02-01|title=New scaling algorithms for the assignment and minimum mean cycle problems|journal=Mathematical Programming|language=en|volume=54|issue=1–3|pages=41–56|doi=10.1007/BF01586040|s2cid=18213947|issn=0025-5610}}</ref>
In addition to the global methods, there are ''local methods'' which are based on finding local updates (rather than full augmenting paths). These methods have worse asymptotic runtime guarantees, but they often work better in practice. These algorithms are called [[auction algorithm]]s, push-relabel algorithms, or preflow-push algorithms. Some of these algorithms were shown to be equivalent.<ref>{{Cite arxiv|last1=Vargas|first1=Marcos C.|last2=Valencia|first2=Carlos E.|last3=Perez|first3=Sergio L.|last4=Alfaro|first4=Carlos A.|date=2018-10-08|title=The equivalence between two classic algorithms for the assignment problem|class=math.OC|language=en|
Some of the local methods assume that the graph admits a ''perfect matching''; if this is not the case, then some of these methods might run forever.<ref name=":0" />{{Rp|3}} A simple technical way to solve this problem is to extend the input graph to a ''complete bipartite graph,'' by adding artificial edges with very large weights. These weights should exceed the weights of all existing matchings, to prevent appearance of artificial edges in the possible solution.
| |||