Deposits of clastic carbonate-dominated (calciclastic) sedimentary slope systems in the rock record have been identified mostly as linearly-consistent carbonate apron deposits, even though most ancient clastic carbonate slope deposits fit the submarine fan systems better. Calciclastic submarine fans are consequently rarely described and are poorly understood. Subsequently, very little is known especially in mud-dominated calciclastic submarine fan systems. Presented in this study are a sedimentological core and petrographic characterisation of samples from eleven boreholes from the Lower Carboniferous of Bowland Basin (Northwest England) that reveals a >250 m thick calciturbidite complex deposited in a calciclastic submarine fan setting. Seven facies are recognised from core and thin section characterisation and are grouped into three carbonate turbidite sequences. They include: 1) Calciturbidites, comprising mostly of highto low-density, wavy-laminated bioclast-rich facies; 2) low-density densite mudstones which are characterised by planar laminated and unlaminated muddominated facies; and 3) Calcidebrites which are muddy or hyper-concentrated debrisflow deposits occurring as poorly-sorted, chaotic, mud-supported floatstones. These

Phd by thesis

problems To understand the class of polynomial-time solvable problems, we must first have a formal notion of what a "problem" is. We define an abstract problem Q to be a binary relation on a set I of problem instances and a set S of problem solutions. For example, an instance for SHORTEST-PATH is a triple consisting of a graph and two vertices. A solution is a sequence of vertices in the graph, with perhaps the empty sequence denoting that no path exists. The problem SHORTEST-PATH itself is the relation that associates each instance of a graph and two vertices with a shortest path in the graph that connects the two vertices. Since shortest paths are not necessarily unique, a given problem instance may have more than one solution. This formulation of an abstract problem is more general than is required for our purposes. As we saw above, the theory of NP-completeness restricts attention to decision problems: those having a yes/no solution. In this case, we can view an abstract decision problem as a function that maps the instance set I to the solution set {0, 1}. For example, a decision problem related to SHORTEST-PATH is the problem PATH that we saw earlier. If i = G, u, v, k is an instance of the decision problem PATH, then PATH(i) = 1 (yes) if a shortest path from u to v has at most k edges, and PATH(i) = 0 (no) otherwise. Many abstract problems are not decision problems, but rather optimization problems, in which some value must be minimized or maximized. As we saw above, however, it is usually a simple matter to recast an optimization problem as a decision problem that is no harder. Encodings If a computer program is to solve an abstract problem, problem instances must be represented in a way that the program understands. An encoding of a set S of abstract objects is a mapping e from S to the set of binary strings. For example, we are all familiar with encoding the natural numbers N = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4,...} as the strings {0, 1, 10, 11, 100,...}. Using this encoding, e(17) = 10001. Anyone who has looked at computer representations of keyboard characters is familiar with either the ASCII or EBCDIC codes. In the ASCII code, the encoding of A is 1000001. Even a compound object can be encoded as a binary string by combining the representations of its constituent parts. Polygons, graphs, functions, ordered pairs, programs-all can be encoded as binary strings. Thus, a computer algorithm that "solves" some abstract decision problem actually takes an encoding of a problem instance as input. We call a problem whose instance set is the set of binary strings a concrete problem. We say that an algorithm solves a concrete problem in time O(T (n)) if, when it is provided a problem instance i of length n = |i|, the algorithm can produce the solution in O(T (n)) time. A concrete problem is polynomial-time solvable, therefore, if there exists an algorithm to solve it in time O(n) for some constant k. We can now formally define the complexity class P as the set of concrete decision problems that are polynomial-time solvable. We can use encodings to map abstract problems to concrete problems. Given an abstract decision problem Q mapping an instance set I to {0, 1}, an encoding e : I → {0, 1}* can be used to induce a related concrete decision problem, which we denote by e(Q). If the solution to an abstract-problem instance i I is Q(i) {0, 1}, then the solution to the concreteproblem instance e(i) {0, 1}* is also Q(i). As a technicality, there may be some binary strings that represent no meaningful abstract-problem instance. For convenience, we shall assume that any such string is mapped arbitrarily to 0. Thus, the concrete problem produces the same solutions as the abstract problem on binary-string instances that represent the encodings of abstract-problem instances. We would like to extend the definition of polynomial-time solvability from concrete problems to abstract problems by using encodings as the bridge, but we would like the definition to be independent of any particular encoding. That is, the efficiency of solving a problem should not depend on how the problem is encoded. Unfortunately, it depends quite heavily on the encoding. For example, suppose that an integer k is to be provided as the sole input to an algorithm, and suppose that the running time of the algorithm is Θ(k). If the integer k is provided in unary-a string of k 1's-then the running time of the algorithm is O(n) on length-n inputs, which is polynomial time. If we use the more natural binary representation of the integer k, however, then the input length is n = ⌊lg k⌋ + 1. In this case, the running time of the algorithm is Θ (k) = Θ(2), which is exponential in the size of the input. Thus, depending on the encoding, the algorithm runs in either polynomial or superpolynomial time. The encoding of an abstract problem is therefore quite important to our under-standing of polynomial time. We cannot really talk about solving an abstract problem without first specifying an encoding. Nevertheless, in practice, if we rule out "expensive" encodings such as unary ones, the actual encoding of a problem makes little difference to whether the problem can be solved in polynomial time. For example, representing integers in base 3 instead of binary has no effect on whether a problem is solvable in polynomial time, since an integer represented in base 3 can be converted to an integer represented in base 2 in polynomial time. We say that a function f : {0, 1}* → {0,1}* is polynomial-time computable if there exists a polynomial-time algorithm A that, given any input x {0, 1}*, produces as output f (x). For some set I of problem instances, we say that two encodings e1 and e2 are polynomially related if there exist two polynomial-time computable functions f12 and f21 such that for any i I , we have f12(e1(i)) = e2(i) and f21(e2(i)) = e1(i). That is, the encoding e2(i) can be computed from the encoding e1(i) by a polynomial-time algorithm, and vice versa. If two encodings e1 and e2 of an abstract problem are polynomially related, whether the problem is polynomial-time solvable or not is independent of which encoding we use, as the following lemma shows. Lemma 34.1 Let Q be an abstract decision problem on an instance set I , and let e1 and e2 be polynomially related encodings on I . Then, e1(Q) P if and only if e2(Q) P. Proof We need only prove the forward direction, since the backward direction is symmetric. Suppose, therefore, that e1(Q) can be solved in time O(nk) for some constant k. Further, suppose that for any problem instance i, the encoding e1(i) can be computed from the encoding e2(i) in time O(n) for some constant c, where n = |e2(i)|. To solve problem e2(Q), on input e2(i), we first compute e1(i) and then run the algorithm for e1(Q) on e1(i). How long does this take? The conversion of encodings takes time O(n), and therefore |e1(i)| = O(n), since the output of a serial computer cannot be longer than its running time. Solving the problem on e1(i) takes time O(|e1(i)|) = O(n), which is polynomial since both c and k are constants. Thus, whether an abstract problem has its instances encoded in binary or base 3 does not affect its "complexity," that is, whether it is polynomial-time solvable or not, but if instances are encoded in unary, its complexity may change. In order to be able to converse in an encoding-independent fashion, we shall generally assume that problem instances are encoded in any reasonable, concise fashion, unless we specifically say otherwise. To be precise, we shall assume that the encoding of an integer is polynomially related to its binary representation, and that the encoding of a finite set is polynomially related to its encoding as a list of its elements, enclosed in braces and separated by commas. (ASCII is one such encoding scheme.) With such a "standard" encoding in hand, we can derive reasonable encodings of other mathematical objects, such as tuples, graphs, and formulas. To denote the standard encoding of an object, we shall enclose the object in angle braces. Thus, G denotes the standard encoding of a graph G. As long as we implicitly use an encoding that is polynomially related to this standard encoding, we can talk directly about abstract problems without reference to any particular encoding, knowing that the choice of encoding has no effect on whether the abstract problem is polynomial-time solvable. Henceforth, we shall generally assume that all problem instances are binary strings encoded using the standard encoding, unless we explicitly specify the contrary. We shall also typically neglect the distinction between abstract and concrete problems. The reader should watch out for problems that arise in practice, however, in which a standard encoding is not obvious and the encoding does make a difference. A formal-language framework One of the convenient aspects of focusing on decision problems is that they make it easy to use the machinery of formal-language theory. It is worthwhile at this point to review some definitions from that theory. An alphabet Σ is a finite set of symbols. A language L over Σ is any set of strings made up of symbols from Σ. For example, if Σ = {0, 1}, the set L = {10, 11, 101, 111, 1011, 1101, 10001,...} is the language of binary representations of prime numbers. We denote the empty string by ε, and the empty language by Ø. The language of all strings over Σ is denoted Σ*. For example, if Σ = {0, 1}, then Σ* = {ε, 0, 1, 00, 01, 10, 11, 000,...} is the set of all binary strings. Every language L over Σ is a subset of Σ*. There are a variety of operations on languages. Set-theoretic operations, such as union and intersection, follow directly from the set-theoretic definitions. We define the complement of L by . The concatenation of two languages L1 and L2 is the language L = {x1x2 : x1 L1 and x2 L2}. The closure or Kleene star of a language L is the language L*= {ε} L L L ···, where Lk is the language obtained by

Introduction to Algorithms, Second Edition

Suppose that we sequentially place $n$ balls into n boxes by putting each ball into a randomly chosen box. It is well known that when we are done, the fullest box has with high probability (1 + o(1))ln n/ln ln n balls in it. Suppose instead that for each ball we choose two boxes at random and place the ball into the one which is less full at the time of placement. We show that with high probability, the fullest box contains only ln ln n/ln 2 + O(1) balls---exponentially less than before. Furthermore, we show that a similar gap exists in the infinite process, where at each step one ball, chosen uniformly at random, is deleted, and one ball is added in the manner above. We discuss consequences of this and related theorems for dynamic resource allocation, hashing, and on-line load balancing.

Balanced Allocations

This paper provides a novel technique for the analysis of randomized algorithms for optimization problems on metric spaces, by relating the randomized performance ratio for any, metric space to the randomized performance ratio for a set of "simple" metric spaces. We define a notion of a set of metric spaces that probabilistically-approximates another metric space. We prove that any metric space can be probabilistically-approximated by hierarchically well-separated trees (HST) with a polylogarithmic distortion. These metric spaces are "simple" as being: (1) tree metrics; (2) natural for applying a divide-and-conquer algorithmic approach. The technique presented is of particular interest in the context of on-line computation. A large number of on-line algorithmic problems, including metrical task systems, server problems, distributed paging, and dynamic storage rearrangement are defined in terms of some metric space. Typically for these problems, there are linear lower bounds on the competitive ratio of deterministic algorithms. Although randomization against an oblivious adversary has the potential of overcoming these high ratios, very little progress has been made in the analysis. We demonstrate the use of our technique by obtaining substantially improved results for two different on-line problems.

Probabilistic approximation of metric spaces and its algorithmic applications

Edgebreaker is a simple scheme for compressing the triangle/vertex incidence graphs (sometimes called connectivity or topology) of three-dimensional triangle meshes. Edgebreaker improves upon the storage required by previously reported schemes, most of which can guarantee only an O(t log(t)) storage cost for the incidence graph of a mesh of t triangles. Edgebreaker requires at most 2t bits for any mesh homeomorphic to a sphere and supports fully general meshes by using additional storage per handle and hole. For large meshes, entropy coding yields less than 1.5 bits per triangle. Edgebreaker's compression and decompression processes perform identical traversals of the mesh from one triangle to an adjacent one. At each stage, compression produces an op-code describing the topological relation between the current triangle and the boundary of the remaining part of the mesh. Decompression uses these op-codes to reconstruct the entire incidence graph. Because Edgebreaker's compression and decompression are independent of the vertex locations, they may be combined with a variety of vertex-compressing techniques that exploit topological information about the mesh to better estimate vertex locations. Edgebreaker may be used to compress the connectivity of an entire mesh bounding a 3D polyhedron or the connectivity of a triangulated surface patch whose boundary need not be encoded. The paper also offers a comparative survey of the rapidly growing field of geometric compression.

/pdf/edgebreaker-connectivity-compression-for-triangle-meshes-u25508x9zc.pdf

Edgebreaker: connectivity compression for triangle meshes

: We give efficient algorithms for maintaining a minimum spanning forest of a planar graph subject to on-line modifications. The modifications supported include changes in the edge weights, and insertion and deletion of edges and vertices. To implement the algorithms, we develop a data structure called an edge-ordered dynamic tree, which is a variant of the dynamic tree data structure of Sleator and Tarjan. Using this data structure, our algorithms run in O(log n) time per operation and O(n) space. The algorithms can be used to maintain the connected components of a dynamic planar graph in O(log n) time per operation.

Maintenance of a minimum spanning forest in a dynamic planar graph

We consider the twin problems of maintaining the bridge-connected components and the biconnected components of a dynamic undirected graph. The allowed changes to the graph are vertex and edge insertions. We give an algorithm for each problem. With simple data structures, each algorithm runs inO(n logn +m) time, wheren is the number of vertices andm is the number of operations. We develop a modified version of the dynamic trees of Sleator and Tarjan that is suitable for efficient recursive algorithms, and use it to reduce the running time of the algorithms for both problems toO(mα(m,n)), where α is a functional inverse of Ackermann's function. This time bound is optimal. All of the algorithms useO(n) space.

Maintaining bridge-connected and biconnected components on-line

Maintenance of a minimum spanning forest in a dynamic plane graph

Short encodings of planar graphs and maps

We prove upper and lower bounds on the competitiveness of randomized algorithms for the list update problem of Sleator and Tarjan. We give a simple and elegant randomized algorithm that is more competitive than the best previous randomized algorithm due to Irani. Our algorithm uses randomness only during an initialization phase, and from then on runs completely deterministically. It is the first randomized competitive algorithm with this property to beat the deterministic lower bound. We generalize our approach to a model in which access costs are fixed but update costs are scaled by an arbitrary constantd. We prove lower bounds for deterministic list update algorithms and for randomized algorithms against oblivious and adaptive on-line adversaries. In particular, we show that for this problem adaptive on-line and adaptive off-line adversaries are equally powerful.

https://cs.gmu.edu/~lifei/teaching/cs695_fall10/eric_list.pdf

Jeffery Westbrook

Papers

Maintenance of a minimum spanning forest in a dynamic planar graph

Maintaining bridge-connected and biconnected components on-line

Maintenance of a minimum spanning forest in a dynamic plane graph

Short encodings of planar graphs and maps

Randomized competitive algorithms for the list update problem