Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 37 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 41 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 10 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 15 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 84 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 198 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 448 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 31 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

A Hierarchy of Lower Bounds for Sublinear Additive Spanners (1607.07497v3)

Published 25 Jul 2016 in cs.DS, cs.CC, cs.DM, and math.CO

Abstract: Spanners, emulators, and approximate distance oracles can be viewed as lossy compression schemes that represent an unweighted graph metric in small space, say $\tilde{O}(n{1+\delta})$ bits. There is an inherent tradeoff between the sparsity parameter $\delta$ and the stretch function $f$ of the compression scheme, but the qualitative nature of this tradeoff has remained a persistent open problem. In this paper we show that the recent additive spanner lower bound of Abboud and Bodwin is just the first step in a hierarchy of lower bounds that fully characterize the asymptotic behavior of the optimal stretch function $f$ as a function of $\delta \in (0,1/3)$. Specifically, for any integer $k\ge 2$, any compression scheme with size $O(n{1+\frac{1}{2k-1} - \epsilon})$ has a sublinear additive stretch function $f$: $$f(d) = d + \Omega(d{1-\frac{1}{k}}).$$ This lower bound matches Thorup and Zwick's (2006) construction of sublinear additive emulators. It also shows that Elkin and Peleg's $(1+\epsilon,\beta)$-spanners have an essentially optimal tradeoff between $\delta,\epsilon,$ and $\beta$, and that the sublinear additive spanners of Pettie (2009) and Chechik (2013) are not too far from optimal. To complement these lower bounds we present a new construction of $(1+\epsilon, O(k/\epsilon){k-1})$-spanners with size $O((k/\epsilon){h_k} kn{1+\frac{1}{2{k+1}-1}})$, where $h_k < 3/4$. This size bound improves on the spanners of Elkin and Peleg (2004), Thorup and Zwick (2006), and Pettie (2009). According to our lower bounds neither the size nor stretch function can be substantially improved.

Citations (74)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.