Towards tight approximation bounds for graph diameter and eccentricities

Arturs Backurs, Liam Roditty, Gilad Segal, Virginia Vassilevska Williams, Nicole Wein

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionpeer-review

31 Scopus citations

Abstract

Among the most important graph parameters is the Diameter, the largest distance between any two vertices. There are no known very efficient algorithms for computing the Diameter exactly. Thus, much research has been devoted to how fast this parameter can be approximated. Chechik et al. [SODA 2014] showed that the diameter can be approximated within a multiplicative factor of 3/2 in Õ(m3/2) time. Furthermore, Roditty and Vassilevska W. [STOC 13] showed that unless the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH) fails, no O(n2−ε) time algorithm can achieve an approximation factor better than 3/2 in sparse graphs. Thus the above algorithm is essentially optimal for sparse graphs for approximation factors less than 3/2. It was, however, completely plausible that a 3/2-approximation is possible in linear time. In this work we conditionally rule out such a possibility by showing that unless SETH fails no O(m3/2−ε) time algorithm can achieve an approximation factor better than 5/3. Another fundamental set of graph parameters are the Eccentricities. The Eccentricity of a vertex is the distance between and the farthest vertex from . Chechik et al. [SODA 2014] showed that the Eccentricities of all vertices can be approximated within a factor of 5/3 in Õ(m3/2) time and Abboud et al. [SODA 2016] showed that no O(n2−ε) algorithm can achieve better than 5/3 approximation in sparse graphs. We show that the runtime of the 5/3 approximation algorithm is also optimal by proving that under SETH, there is no O(m3/2−ε) algorithm that achieves a better than 9/5 approximation. We also show that no near-linear time algorithm can achieve a better than 2 approximation for the Eccentricities. This is the first lower bound in fine-grained complexity that addresses near-linear time computation. We show that our lower bound for near-linear time algorithms is essentially tight by giving an algorithm that approximates Eccentricities within a 2 + factor in Õ(m/) time for any 0 < < 1. This beats all Eccentricity algorithms in Cairo et al. [SODA 2016] and is the first constant factor approximation for Eccentricities in directed graphs. To establish the above lower bounds we study the S-T Diameter problem: Given a graph and two subsets S and T of vertices, output the largest distance between a vertex in S and a vertex in T. We give new algorithms and show tight lower bounds that serve as a starting point for all other hardness results. Our lower bounds apply only to sparse graphs. We show that for dense graphs, there are near-linear time algorithms for S-T Diameter, Diameter and Eccentricities, with almost the same approximation guarantees as their Õ(m3/2) counterparts, improving upon the best known algorithms for dense graphs.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationSTOC 2018 - Proceedings of the 50th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing
EditorsMonika Henzinger, David Kempe, Ilias Diakonikolas
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery
Pages1220-1233
Number of pages14
ISBN (Electronic)9781450355599
DOIs
StatePublished - 20 Jun 2018
Event50th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2018 - Los Angeles, United States
Duration: 25 Jun 201829 Jun 2018

Publication series

NameProceedings of the Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing
ISSN (Print)0737-8017

Conference

Conference50th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2018
Country/TerritoryUnited States
CityLos Angeles
Period25/06/1829/06/18

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Association for Computing Machinery.

Keywords

  • Approximation algorithms
  • Diameter
  • Eccentricities
  • Fine-grained complexity

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Towards tight approximation bounds for graph diameter and eccentricities'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this