STOC ’20, June 22–26, 2020, Chicago, IL, USA Maximilian Probst Gutenberg, Virginia Vassilevska Williams, Nicole Wein
obtaining stronger lower bounds. In
𝑠
-
𝑡
SP, one wants to maintain
a shortest path from 𝑠 to 𝑡 for some xed 𝑠 and 𝑡.
1.1 Motivation
Partially dynamic SSSP is a well-motivated problem with wide-
ranging applications:
•
Partially dynamic data structures are often used as internal
data structures to solve the fully dynamic version of the
problem (see for example [
42
,
46
,
51
] for applications of par-
tially dynamic SSSP) which in turn can be used to maintain
properties of real-world graphs undergoing changes.
•
Partially dynamic SSSP is often employed as internal data
structure for related problems such as maintaining the di-
ameter in partially dynamic graphs [
12
,
25
] or matchings in
incremental bipartite graphs [20].
•
Many static algorithms use partially dynamic algorithms as
a subroutine. For example, incremental All-Pairs Shortest
Paths can be used to construct light spanners [
10
] and greedy
spanners. Moreover, a recent line of research shows that
many ow problems can be reduced to decremental SSSP,
and recent progress has already led to faster algorithms
for multi-commodity ow [
49
], vertex-capacitated ow, and
sparsest vertex-cut [27].
1.2 Prior Work
In this section we discuss prior work directly related to our results.
We use
˜
𝑂
notation to suppress factors of
log 𝑛
and assume constant
𝜖
in the approximation. For a more detailed discussion of prior
results, we refer the reader to the full version of the article.
Let
𝑚
be the maximum number of edges and let
𝑛
be the max-
imum number of vertices
1
in any version of the dynamic input
graph
𝐺
. If
𝐺
is weighted, we denote by
𝑊
the aspect ratio of the
graph, which is the largest weight divided by the smallest weight in
the graph. For partially dynamic algorithms, we follow the conven-
tion of stating the total update time rather than the time for each
individual update. Unless otherwise stated, queries take worst-case
constant time.
Algorithms for partially dynamic directed SSSP.
For directed
graphs, the classic ES-tree data structure by Even and Shiloach
[
53
] and its later extensions by Henzinger and King [
45
] initi-
ated the eld, with total update time
𝑂 (𝑚𝑛𝑊 )
for exact incremen-
tal/decremental directed SSSP. Using an edge rounding technique
[
15
,
16
,
28
,
49
,
50
,
58
], the ES-tree can further handle edge weights
more eciently, giving an
˜
𝑂 (𝑚𝑛 log𝑊 )
time algorithm for incre-
mental/decremental
(
1
+𝜖)
-approximate directed SSSP. This result
has been improved to total update time
𝑚𝑛
9/10+𝑜 (1)
log𝑊
by the
breakthrough results of Henzinger, Forster, and Nanongkai [
40
,
41
].
Their algorithm is Monte Carlo and works against an oblivious
adversary (an adversary that xes the entire graph sequence of up-
dates in advance). Whilst presented only in the decremental setting,
this algorithm appears to extend to the incremental setting.
Very recently, Probst and Wul-Nilsen [
37
] improved upon this
result and presented a randomized data structure for decremental
directed SSSP against an oblivious adversary with total update time
1
Some algorithms allow vertex updates, therefore the number of vertices might be due
to change.
˜
𝑂 (min{𝑚𝑛
3/4
log𝑊 , 𝑚
3/4
𝑛
5/4
log𝑊 })
. They also give a Las Vegas
algorithm with total update time
˜
𝑂 (𝑚
3/4
𝑛
5/4
log𝑊 )
that works
against an adaptive adversary. They also get slightly improved
bounds for unweighted decremental graphs. We point out, however,
that their data structure cannot return approximate shortest paths
to the adversary as it would reveal the random choices. Further,
unlike the data structure by Henzinger et al., their approach cannot
be extended to the incremental setting since it relies heavily on
nding ecient separators and on maintaining the topological
order of vertices in the graph.
In summary, all known partially dynamic algorithms for directed
graphs that are faster than ES-trees are randomized, and their amor-
tized update time even for 𝑚 ∼ 𝑛
2
insertions is at least some poly-
nomial. Moreover, it is unclear how to extend the result from [
37
] to
the incremental setting. This is in stark contrast to the undirected
setting where the currently best bounds for decremental graphs
[
18
,
38
,
39
] extend straight-forwardly to incremental graphs. This
is reminiscent of the connectivity problem, which in undirected
incremental graphs is almost trivial while the problem of main-
taining strong-connectivity in directed graphs is solved to near-
optimality in decremental graphs [
21
] but still not fully understood
in incremental graphs [
14
,
17
,
22
]. We believe that understand-
ing strong-connectivity might be a preliminary for understanding
single-source shortest paths in directed graphs.
Lower bounds.
Conditional lower bounds for partially dynamic
SSSP were rst studied by Roditty and Zwick [
51
]. They showed
that in the weighted setting, APSP can be reduced to partially
dynamic SSSP with
𝑂 (𝑛
2
)
updates and queries, thus implying that
the amortized query/update time must be
𝑛
1−𝑜 (1)
, unless APSP can
be solved in truly subcubic time (i.e. 𝑛
3−𝜖
for constant 𝜖 > 0).
For unweighted SSSP in the partially dynamic setting, there is a
weaker lower bound [
51
]: Under the Boolean Matrix Multiplication
(BMM) hypothesis, any combinatorial incremental/decremental
algorithm for unweighted SSSP requires amortized
𝑛
1−𝑜 (1)
up-
date/query time. Abboud and Vassilevska Williams [
3
] modied
the [
51
] construction to give stronger lower bounds even for the un-
weighted
𝑠
-
𝑡
SP problem: any combinatorial incremental/decremental
algorithm for unweighted
𝑠
-
𝑡
SP requires either amortized
𝑛
1−𝑜 (1)
update time or 𝑛
2−𝑜 (1)
query time.
We point out that the unweighted SSSP lower bounds of [
3
,
51
] are weak in two ways: (1) they are only for combinatorial
algorithms, and (2) they hold only when the number of edges
𝑚
is
quadratic in the number of vertices, so in terms of
𝑚
, the update
lower bound is merely
𝑚
0.5−𝑜 (1)
. Henzinger et al. [
44
] aimed to
rectify (1). They introduced a very believable assumption, the OMv
Hypothesis, which is believed to hold for arbitrary algorithms,
not merely combinatorial ones. Henzinger et al. [
44
] showed that
under the OMv Hypothesis, incremental/decremental
𝑠
-
𝑡
SP (in the
word-RAM model) requires
𝑚
0.5−𝑜 (1)
amortized update time
2
or
𝑚
1−𝑜 (1)
query time, thus obtaining the same lower bounds as under
the BMM Hypothesis, but now for not necessarily combinatorial
algorithms.
2
Similar to the lower bounds based on BMM, the Henzinger et al. [
44
] lower bound on
the update time is
𝑛
1−𝑜 (1
)
but the number of edges in the construction is quadratic in
𝑛, so that in terms of 𝑚, the lower bound is 𝑚
0.5−𝑜 (1)
.
154
评论0