skip to main content
article

On Developing New Models, with Paging as a Case Study

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 January 2010Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

As computer science has progressed, numerous models and measures have been developed over the years. Among the most commonly used in theoretical computer science are the RAM model, the I/O model, worst case analysis, space (memory) usage, average case analysis, amortized analysis, adaptive analysis and the competitive ratio. New models are added to this list every few years to re ect varying constraints imposed by novel application or advances in computer architectures. Examples of alternative models are the transdichotomous RAM or word-RAM, the data stream model, the MapReduce model, the cache oblivious model and the smoothed analysis model. New models and measures, when successful expand our understanding of computation and open new avenues of inquiry. As it is to be expected relatively few models and paradigms are introduced every year, and even less are eventually proven successful. In this paper we discuss rst certain shortcomings of the online competitive analysis model particularly as it concerns paging, discuss existing solutions in the literature as well as present recent progress in developing models and measures that better re ect actual practice for the case of paging. From there we proceed to a more general discussion on how to measure and evaluate new models within theoretical computer science and how to contrast them, when appropriate, to existing models. Lastly, we highlight certain \natural" choices and assumptions of the standard worst-case model which are often unstated and rarely explicitly justied. We contrast these choices to those made in the formalization of probability theory.

References

  1. {ADLO07} S. Angelopoulos, R. Dorrigiv, and A. López-Ortiz. On the separation and equivalence of paging strategies. In Proc. SODA, pages 229-237, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. {ADLO08} S. Angelopoulos, R. Dorrigiv, and A. Lóopez-Ortiz. List update with locality of reference. In Proc. LATIN, pages 399-410, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. {AFG05} S. Albers, L. M. Favrholdt, and O. Giel. On paging with locality of reference. JCSS, 70(2):145-175, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. {AL08} S. Albers and S. Lauer. On list update with locality of reference. In Proc. ICALP, pages 96-107, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. {ALOH08} Spyros Angelopoulos, Alejandro López-Ortiz, and Angèle M. Hamel. Optimal scheduling of contract algorithms with soft deadlines. In AAAI, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. {AS09} S. Angelopoulos and P. Schweitzer. Paging and list update under bijective analysis. In Proc. SODA, pages 1136-1145, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. {AV88} A. Aggarwal and J. S. Vitter. The Input/Output complexity of sorting and related problems. Communications of the ACM, 31(9):1116-1127, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. {BD86} G. E. P. Box and N. R. Draper. Empirical model-building and response surface. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. {BDB94} S. Ben-David and A. Borodin. A new measure for the study of on-line algorithms. Algorithmica, 11:73-91, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. {Bec04} L. Becchetti. Modeling locality: A probabilistic analysis of LRU and FWF. In Proc. ESA, pages 98-109, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. {BEY97} R. Bachrach and R. El-Yaniv. Online list accessing algorithms and their applications: Recent empirical evidence. In Proc. SODA, pages 53-62, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. {BEY98} A. Borodin and R. El-Yaniv. Online Computation and Competitive Analysis. Cambridge University Press, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. {BF03} J. Boyar and L. M. Favrholdt. The relative worst order ratio for on-line algorithms. In Proc. Italian Conf. on Algorithms and Complexity, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. {BFL05} J. Boyar, L. M. Favrholdt, and K. S. Larsen. The relative worst order ratio applied to paging. In Proc. SODA, pages 718-727, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. {BHH+02} Therese C. Biedl, Masud Hasan, Joseph Douglas Horton, Alejandro López-Ortiz, and Tomás Vinar. Searching for the center of a circle. In CCCG, pages 137-141, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. {BIRS95} A. Borodin, S. Irani, P. Raghavan, and B. Schieber. Competitive paging with locality of reference. JCSS, 50:244-258, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. {BL99} J. Boyar and K. S. Larsen. The Seat Reservation Problem. Algorithmica, 25(4):403-417, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. {BLN01} J. Boyar, K. S. Larsen, and M. N. Nielsen. The Accommodating Function: A generalization of the competitive ratio. SIAM Journal on Computing, 31(1):233-258, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. {BM04} J. Boyar and P. Medvedev. The relative worst order ratio applied to seat reservation. In Proc. SWAT, pages 90-101, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. {CN99} M. Chrobak and J. Noga. LRU is better than FIFO. Algorithmica, 23(2):180-185, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. {DELO09} R. Dorrigiv, M. R. Ehmsen, and A. López-Ortiz. Parameterized analysis of paging and list update algorithms. In Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Approximation and Online Algorithms (WAOA '09), 2009. to appear. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. {Den68} P. J. Denning. The working set model for program behaviour. CACM, 11(5):323-333, 1968. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. {Den80} P. J. Denning. Working sets past and present. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering , SE-6(1):64-84, 1980. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. {Den05} P. J. Denning. The locality principle. CACM, 48(7):19-24, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. {DHS95} A. Datta, Ch. Hipke, and S. Schuierer. Competitive searching in polygons--beyond generalized streets. In Proc. 6th ISAAC, pages 32-41. LNCS 1004, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. {DLO05} R. Dorrigiv and A. López-Ortiz. A survey of performance measures for on-line algorithms. SIGACT News, 36(3):67-81, September 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. {DLO07} R. Dorrigiv and A. López-Ortiz. The cooperative ratio of on-line algorithms. Technical Report CS-2007-39, University of Waterloo, Cheriton School of Computer science, October 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. {DLO08} R. Dorrigiv and A. López-Ortiz. Adaptive searching in one and two dimensions. In Proc. CCCG, pages 215-218, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. {FW98} A. Fiat and G. J. Woeginger. Competitive odds and ends. In A. Fiat and G. J. Woeginger, editors, Online Algorithms -- The State of the Art, volume 1442 of LNCS, pages 385-394. Springer-Verlag, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. {HH85} J. H. Hester and D. S. Hirschberg. Self-organizing linear search. ACM Computing Surveys, 17(3):295, September 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. {HIKK01} F. Hoffmann, C. Icking, R. Klein, and K. Kriegel. The polygon exploration problem. SIAM J. Comput, 31(2):577-600, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. {Ick94} Ch. Icking. Motion and Visibility in Simple Polygons. Dissertation, Fernuniversität Hagen, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. {IKM93} Christian Icking, Rolf Klein, and Lihong Ma. How to look around a corner. In CCCG, pages 443-448, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. {IKP96} S. Irani, A. R. Karlin, and S. Phillips. Strongly competitive algorithms for paging with locality of reference. SIAM Journal on Computing, 25:477-497, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. {Ira98} S. Irani. Competitive analysis of paging. In Amos Fiat and Gerhard J. Woeginger, editors, Online Algorithms -- The State of the Art, volume 1442 of LNCS, pages 52-73. 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. {Ken96} C. Kenyon. Best-fit bin-packing with random order. In Proc. SODA, pages 359-364, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. {KMSY94} M.-Y. Kao, Y. Ma, M. Sipser, and Y. Yin. Optimal constructions of hybrid algorithms. In Proc. 5th SODA, pages 372-381, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. {KP00} E. Koutsoupias and C. Papadimitriou. Beyond competitive analysis. SIAM Journal on Computing, 30:300-317, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. {KPR00} A. R. Karlin, S. J. Phillips, and P. Raghavan. Markov paging. SIAM Journal on Computing, 30(3):906-922, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. {KRT93} M.-Y. Kao, J. H. Reif, and S. R. Tate. Searching in an unknown environment: An optimal randomized algorithm for the cow-path problem. In Proc. 4th SODA, pages 441-447, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. {Kru} P. Krugman. How i work. Available at: http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/howiwork.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. {LO96} A. López-Ortiz. On-line Target Searching in Bounded and Unbounded Domains. PhD thesis, Dept. of Comp. Sci., University of Waterloo, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. {LOAH06} Alejandro López-Ortiz, Spyros Angelopoulos, and Angèle M. Hamel. Optimal scheduling of contract algorithms for anytime problems. In AAAI, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. {LOS96} A. López-Ortiz and S. Schuierer. Walking streets faster. In Proc. 5th SWAT, pages 345-356. LNCS 1097, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. {LOS01a} A. López-Ortiz and S. Schuierer. The ultimate strategy to search on m rays? Theoretical Computer Science, 261(2):267-295, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. {LOS01b} Alejandro López-Ortiz and Graeme Sweet. Parallel searching on a lattice. In CCCG, pages 125-128, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. {LOS02} Alejandro López-Ortiz and Sven Schuierer. Online parallel heuristics and robot searching under the competitive framework. In SWAT, pages 260-269, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. {LOS04} A. López-Ortiz and S. Schuierer. On-line parallel heuristics, processor scheduling and robot searching under the competitive framework. Theoretical Computer Science, 310(1- 3):527-537, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. {PAZ09} Chris Hamilton Peyman Afshani and Norbert Zeh. Cache-oblivious range reporting with optimal queries requires superlinear space. In SCG '09: Proceedings of the 25th annual symposium on Computational geometry, pages 277-286. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. {Pro99} H. Prokop. Cache-oblivious algorithms. Master's thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. {PS06} K. Panagiotou and A. Souza. On adequate performance measures for paging. In Proc. STOC, pages 487-496, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. {RS71} Henry R. Richardson and Lawrence D. Stone. Operations analysis during the under-water search for scorpions. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 18(2):141-157, 1971.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. {RWS94} N. Reingold, J. Westbrook, and D. D. Sleator. Randomized competitive algorithms for the list update problem. Algorithmica, 11:15-32, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. {Sch98} F. Schulz. Two new families of list update algorithms. In Proc. ISAAC, pages 99-108, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. {ST85a} D. D. Sleator and R. E. Tarjan. Amortized efficiency of list update and paging rules. CACM, 28:202-208, 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. {ST85b} D. D. Sleator and R. E. Tarjan. Self-adjusting binary search trees. JACM, 32(3):652- 686, 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. {Tor98} E. Torng. A unified analysis of paging and caching. Algorithmica, 20(2):175-200, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. {Uni} New Mexico State University. Homepage of new mexico state university tracebase (online). Available at: http://tracebase.nmsu.edu/tracebase.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. {You94} N. E. Young. The k-server dual and loose competitiveness for paging. Algorithmica, 11(6):525-541, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. {You98} N. E. Young. Bounding the diffuse adversary. In Proc. SODA, pages 420-425, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. {You00} N. E. Young. On-line paging against adversarially biased random inputs. Journal of Algorithms, 37(1):218-235, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. {You02} N. E. Young. On-line file caching. Algorithmica, 33(3):371-383, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

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

Full Access

  • Published in

    cover image ACM SIGACT News
    ACM SIGACT News  Volume 40, Issue 4
    December 2009
    152 pages
    ISSN:0163-5700
    DOI:10.1145/1711475
    Issue’s Table of Contents

    Copyright © 2010 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s)

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 25 January 2010

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • article

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader