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 45 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 54 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 22 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 20 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 99 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 183 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 467 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 38 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Lower Bounds on Sparse Spanners, Emulators, and Diameter-reducing shortcuts (1802.06271v2)

Published 17 Feb 2018 in cs.DS

Abstract: We prove better lower bounds on additive spanners and emulators, which are lossy compression schemes for undirected graphs, as well as lower bounds on shortcut sets, which reduce the diameter of directed graphs. We show that any $O(n)$-size shortcut set cannot bring the diameter below $\Omega(n{1/6})$, and that any $O(m)$-size shortcut set cannot bring it below $\Omega(n{1/11})$. These improve Hesse's [Hesse03] lower bound of $\Omega(n{1/17})$. By combining these constructions with Abboud and Bodwin's [AbboudB17] edge-splitting technique, we get additive stretch lower bounds of $+\Omega(n{1/11})$ for $O(n)$-size spanners and $+\Omega(n{1/18})$ for $O(n)$-size emulators. These improve Abboud and Bodwin's $+\Omega(n{1/22})$ lower bounds.

Citations (31)

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.