skip to main content
10.1145/2897518.2897555acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesstocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access
Best Student Paper

The 4/3 additive spanner exponent is tight

Published:19 June 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

A spanner is a sparse subgraph that approximately preserves the pairwise distances of the original graph. It is well known that there is a smooth tradeoff between the sparsity of a spanner and the quality of its approximation, so long as distance error is measured multiplicatively. A central open question in the field is to prove or disprove whether such a tradeoff exists also in the regime of additive error. That is, is it true that for all ε>0, there is a constant kε such that every graph has a spanner on O(n1+ε) edges that preserves its pairwise distances up to +kε? Previous lower bounds are consistent with a positive resolution to this question, while previous upper bounds exhibit the beginning of a tradeoff curve: all graphs have +2 spanners on O(n3/2) edges, +4 spanners on Õ(n7/5) edges, and +6 spanners on O(n4/3) edges. However, progress has mysteriously halted at the n4/3 bound, and despite significant effort from the community, the question has remained open for all 0 < ε < 1/3.

Our main result is a surprising negative resolution of the open question, even in a highly generalized setting. We show a new information theoretic incompressibility bound: there is no function that compresses graphs into O(n4/3 − ε) bits so that distance information can be recovered within +no(1) error. As a special case of our theorem, we get a tight lower bound on the sparsity of additive spanners: the +6 spanner on O(n4/3) edges cannot be improved in the exponent, even if any subpolynomial amount of additive error is allowed. Our theorem implies new lower bounds for related objects as well; for example, the twenty-year-old +4 emulator on O(n4/3) edges also cannot be improved in the exponent unless the error allowance is polynomial.

Central to our construction is a new type of graph product, which we call the Obstacle Product. Intuitively, it takes two graphs G,H and produces a new graph G H whose shortest paths structure looks locally like H but globally like G.

References

  1. Amir Abboud and Greg Bodwin. Error Amplification for Pairwise Spanner Lower Bounds. In Proc. of 27th SODA, to appear, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Donald Aingworth, Chandra Chekuri, Piotr Indyk, and Rajeev Motwani. Fast estimation of diameter and shortest paths (without matrix multiplication). SIAM J. Comput., 28:1167–1181, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Donald Aingworth, Chandra Chekuri, and Rajeev Motwani. Fast Estimation of Diameter and Shortest Paths (without Matrix Multiplication). In Proc. of 7th SODA., pages 547–553, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Noga Alon. Testing subgraphs in large graphs. In Proc. of 42nd FOCS, pages 434–441, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. I Althöfer, G Das, D Dobkin, D Joseph, and J Soares. On sparse spanners of weighted graphs. Discrete &amp; Computational Geometry, 9:81–100, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Baruch Awerbuch. Complexity of network synchronization. Journal of the ACM, pages 32,804–823, 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Surender Baswana, Telikepalli Kavitha, Kurt Mehlhorn, and Seth Pettie. New constructions of (α, β)-spanners and purely additive spanners. In Proc. of 16th SODA, pages 672–681, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Surender Baswana, Telikepalli Kavitha, Kurt Mehlhorn, and Seth Pettie. Additive spanners and (α, β)-spanners. ACM Transactions on Algorithms, 7(1):5, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Felix A Behrend. On sets of integers which contain no three terms in arithmetical progression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 32(12):331, 1946.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Greg Bodwin and Virginia Vassilevska Williams. Very Sparse Additive Spanners and Emulators. In Proc. of 6th ITCS, pages 377–382, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Greg Bodwin and Virginia Vassilevska Williams. Better Distance Preservers and Additive Spanners. In Proc. of 27th SODA, to appear, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Béla Bollobás, Don Coppersmith, and Michael Elkin. Sparse distance preservers and additive spanners. In Proc. of 14th SODA, pages 414–423, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Jean Bourgain. On lipschitz embedding of finite metric spaces in hilbert space. Israel Journal of Mathematics, 52(1-2):46–52, 1985.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Shiri Chechik. New Additive Spanners. In Proc. of 24th SODA, pages 498–512, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Shiri Chechik. Additive Spanners. In Encyclopedia of Algorithms. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Don Coppersmith and Michael Elkin. Sparse Sourcewise and Pairwise Distance Preservers. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, pages 463–501, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Marek Cygan, Fabrizio Grandoni, and Telikepalli Kavitha. On Pairwise Spanners. In Proc. of 30th STACS, pages 209–220, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Dorit Dor, Shay Halperin, and Uri Zwick. All Pairs Almost Shortest Paths. In Proc. of 37th FOCS, pages 452–461, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Michael Elkin. Computing almost shortest paths. ACM Trans. Algorithms, pages 1(2):283–323, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Michael Elkin and David Peleg. (1 +, β)-spanner constructions for general graphs. SIAM J. Comput., 33(3):608ˆ a ˘ A¸ S631, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Paul Erdös. Extremal problems in graph theory. Theory of graphs and its applications, pages 29–36, 1964.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Telikepalli Kavitha. New Pairwise Spanners. In Proc. of 32nd STACS, pages 513–526, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Telikepalli Kavitha and Nithin Varma. Small Stretch Pairwise Spanners. In Proc. of 40th ICALP, pages 601–612, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Mathias Bæk Tejs Knudsen. Additive spanners: A simple construction. In Proc. of 14th SWAT, pages 277–281, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Arthur L. Liestman and Thomas C. Shermer. Additive spanners for hypercubes. Parallel Processing Letters, 1(01):35–42, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Arthur L. Liestman and Thomas C. Shermer. Additive graph spanners. Networks, 23(4):343–363, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Jiˇ r´ı Matouˇ sek. On the distortion required for embedding finite metric spaces into normed spaces. Israel Journal of Mathematics, 93(1):333–344, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Merav Parter. Bypassing Erdös’ Girth Conjecture: Hybrid Stretch and Sourcewise Spanners. In Proc. of 41st ICALP, pages 608–619, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. David Peleg and Alejandro Schaffer. Graph spanners. Journal of Graph Theory, pages 13:99–116, 1989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. David Peleg and Jeffrey D. Ullman. An optimal synchronizer for the hypercube. SIAM Journal of Computing, pages 18,740–747, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Seth Pettie. Low distortion spanners. ACM Transactions on Algorithms, 6(1), 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Liam Roditty, Mikkel Thorup, and Uri Zwick. Deterministic Constructions of Approximate Distance Oracles and Spanners. In Proc. of 32nd ICALP, pages 261–272, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Mikkel Thorup and Uri Zwick. Approximate distance oracles. Journal of the ACM, 52(1):1–24, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Mikkel Thorup and Uri Zwick. Spanners and emulators with sublinear distance errors. In Proc. of 17th SODA, pages 802–809, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. David P. Woodruff. Lower bounds for additive spanners, emulators, and more. In Proc. of 47th FOCS, pages 389–398, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. David P. Woodruff. Additive Spanners in Nearly Quadratic Time. In Proc. of 37th ICALP, pages 463–474, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Graphs with many longdisjoint shortest pathsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. The 4/3 additive spanner exponent is tight

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        STOC '16: Proceedings of the forty-eighth annual ACM symposium on Theory of Computing
        June 2016
        1141 pages
        ISBN:9781450341325
        DOI:10.1145/2897518

        Copyright © 2016 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 19 June 2016

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate1,469of4,586submissions,32%

        Upcoming Conference

        STOC '24
        56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2024)
        June 24 - 28, 2024
        Vancouver , BC , Canada

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader