scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers by "Ulrich Meyer published in 2019"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work presents novel generators for a variety of network models that are frequently used as benchmarks by making use of pseudorandomization and divide-and-conquer schemes, which are thus embarrassingly parallel and have a near optimal scaling behavior.

22 citations


Proceedings ArticleDOI
01 Jan 2019
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present the first implementation of an efficient GIRG generator running in expected linear time, which is capable of generating graphs with ten million edges in under a second on commodity hardware.
Abstract: Hyperbolic random graphs (HRG) and geometric inhomogeneous random graphs (GIRG) are two similar generative network models that were designed to resemble complex real world networks. In particular, they have a power-law degree distribution with controllable exponent beta, and high clustering that can be controlled via the temperature T. We present the first implementation of an efficient GIRG generator running in expected linear time. Besides varying temperatures, it also supports underlying geometries of higher dimensions. It is capable of generating graphs with ten million edges in under a second on commodity hardware. The algorithm can be adapted to HRGs. Our resulting implementation is the fastest sequential HRG generator, despite the fact that we support non-zero temperatures. Though non-zero temperatures are crucial for many applications, most existing generators are restricted to T = 0. We also support parallelization, although this is not the focus of this paper. Moreover, we note that our generators draw from the correct probability distribution, i.e., they involve no approximation. Besides the generators themselves, we also provide an efficient algorithm to determine the non-trivial dependency between the average degree of the resulting graph and the input parameters of the GIRG model. This makes it possible to specify the desired expected average degree as input. Moreover, we investigate the differences between HRGs and GIRGs, shedding new light on the nature of the relation between the two models. Although HRGs represent, in a certain sense, a special case of the GIRG model, we find that a straight-forward inclusion does not hold in practice. However, the difference is negligible for most use cases.

21 citations


Posted Content
TL;DR: The first implementation of an efficient GIRG generator running in expected linear time is presented, and an efficient algorithm is provided to determine the non-trivial dependency between the average degree of the resulting graph and the input parameters of the GIRGs model.
Abstract: Hyperbolic random graphs (HRG) and geometric inhomogeneous random graphs (GIRG) are two similar generative network models that were designed to resemble complex real world networks. In particular, they have a power-law degree distribution with controllable exponent $\beta$, and high clustering that can be controlled via the temperature $T$. We present the first implementation of an efficient GIRG generator running in expected linear time. Besides varying temperatures, it also supports underlying geometries of higher dimensions. It is capable of generating graphs with ten million edges in under a second on commodity hardware. The algorithm can be adapted to HRGs. Our resulting implementation is the fastest sequential HRG generator, despite the fact that we support non-zero temperatures. Though non-zero temperatures are crucial for many applications, most existing generators are restricted to $T = 0$. Our generators support parallelization, although this is not the focus of this paper. We note that our generators draw from the correct probability distribution, i.e., they involve no approximation. Besides the generators themselves, we also provide an efficient algorithm to determine the non-trivial dependency between the average degree of the resulting graph and the input parameters of the GIRG model. This makes it possible to specify the expected average degree as input. Moreover, we investigate the differences between HRGs and GIRGs, shedding new light on the nature of the relation between the two models. Although HRGs represent, in a certain sense, a special case of the GIRG model, we find that a straight-forward inclusion does not hold in practice. However, the difference is negligible for most use cases.

8 citations


Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, the fragile complexity of comparison-based algorithms is defined as the maximal number of comparisons any individual element takes part in in the comparison process, and the results include both deterministic and randomized upper and lower bounds, and demonstrate a separation between the two settings for a number of problems.
Abstract: We initiate a study of algorithms with a focus on the computational complexity of individual elements, and introduce the fragile complexity of comparison-based algorithms as the maximal number of comparisons any individual element takes part in. We give a number of upper and lower bounds on the fragile complexity for fundamental problems, including Minimum, Selection, Sorting and Heap Construction. The results include both deterministic and randomized upper and lower bounds, and demonstrate a separation between the two settings for a number of problems. The depth of a comparator network is a straight-forward upper bound on the worst case fragile complexity of the corresponding fragile algorithm. We prove that fragile complexity is a different and strictly easier property than the depth of comparator networks, in the sense that for some problems a fragile complexity equal to the best network depth can be achieved with less total work and that with randomization, even a lower fragile complexity is possible.

3 citations


Proceedings ArticleDOI
01 Sep 2019
TL;DR: It is proved that for some problems a fragile complexity equal to the best network depth can be achieved with less total work and that with randomization, even a lower fragile complexity is possible.
Abstract: We initiate a study of algorithms with a focus on the computational complexity of individual elements, and introduce the fragile complexity of comparison-based algorithms as the maximal number of comparisons any individual element takes part in. We give a number of upper and lower bounds on the fragile complexity for fundamental problems, including Minimum, Selection, Sorting and Heap Construction. The results include both deterministic and randomized upper and lower bounds, and demonstrate a separation between the two settings for a number of problems. The depth of a comparator network is a straight-forward upper bound on the worst case fragile complexity of the corresponding fragile algorithm. We prove that fragile complexity is a different and strictly easier property than the depth of comparator networks, in the sense that for some problems a fragile complexity equal to the best network depth can be achieved with less total work and that with randomization, even a lower fragile complexity is possible.

2 citations


Proceedings ArticleDOI
01 Jan 2019
TL;DR: A lower bound is proved on the cost of maintaining optimal height ceil[log_B(n)], which shows that this cost must increase from Omega(1/B) to Omega(n/ B) rebalancing per update as n grows from one power of B to the next.
Abstract: Any B-tree has height at least ceil[log_B(n)]. Static B-trees achieving this height are easy to build. In the dynamic case, however, standard B-tree rebalancing algorithms only maintain a height within a constant factor of this optimum. We investigate exactly how close to ceil[log_B(n)] the height of dynamic B-trees can be maintained as a function of the rebalancing cost. In this paper, we prove a lower bound on the cost of maintaining optimal height ceil[log_B(n)], which shows that this cost must increase from Omega(1/B) to Omega(n/B) rebalancing per update as n grows from one power of B to the next. We also provide an almost matching upper bound, demonstrating this lower bound to be essentially tight. We then give a variant upper bound which can maintain near-optimal height at low cost. As two special cases, we can maintain optimal height for all but a vanishing fraction of values of n using Theta(log_B(n)) amortized rebalancing cost per update and we can maintain a height of optimal plus one using O(1/B) amortized rebalancing cost per update. More generally, for any rebalancing budget, we can maintain (as n grows from one power of B to the next) optimal height essentially up to the point where the lower bound requires the budget to be exceeded, after which optimal height plus one is maintained. Finally, we prove that this balancing scheme gives B-trees with very good storage utilization.

1 citations


DOI
01 Jan 2019
TL;DR: The extended abstracts included in this report contain both recent state of the art advances and lay the foundation for new directions within data structures research.
Abstract: This report documents the program and the outcomes of Dagstuhl Seminar 16101 "Data Structures for the Cloud and External Memory Data". In today's computing environment vast amounts of data are processed, exchanged and analyzed. The manner in which information is stored profoundly influences the efficiency of these operations over the data. In spite of the maturity of the field many data structuring problems are still open, while new ones arise due to technological advances. The seminar covered both recent advances in the "classical" data structuring topics as well as new models of computation adapted to modern architectures, scientific studies that reveal the need for such models, applications where large data sets play a central role, modern computing platforms for very large data, and new data structures for large data in modern architectures. The extended abstracts included in this report contain both recent state of the art advances and lay the foundation for new directions within data structures research.