Search

The standard measure for the quality of online algorithms is the competitive ratio. This measure is generally applicable, and for some problems it works well, but for others it fails to distinguish between algorithms that have very different performance. Thus, ever since its introduction, researchers have worked on improving the measure, defining variants, or defining measures based on other concepts to improve on the situation. Relative worst-order analysis (RWOA) is one of the most thoroughly tested such proposals. With RWOA, many separations of algorithms not obtainable with competitive analysis have been found. In RWOA, two algorithms are compared directly, rather than indirectly as is done in competitive analysis, where both algorithms are compared separately to an optimal offline algorithm. If, up to permutations of the request sequences, one algorithm is always at least as good and sometimes better than another, then the first algorithm is deemed the better algorithm by RWOA. We survey the most important results obtained with this technique and compare it with other quality measures. The survey includes a quite complete set of references. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In online scenarios requests arrive over time, and each request must be serviced in an irrevocable manner before the next request arrives. Online algorithms with advice is an area of research where one attempts to measure how much knowledge of future requests is necessary to achieve a given performance level, as defined by the competitive ratio. When this knowledge, the advice, is obtainable, this leads to practical algorithms, called semi-online algorithms. On the other hand, each negative result gives robust results about the limitations of a broad range of semi-online algorithms. This survey explains the models for online algorithms with advice, motivates the study in general, presents some examples of the work that has been carried out, and includes an extensive set of references, organized by problem studied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We define a new measure for the quality of online algorithms, the relative worst order ratio, using ideas from the max/max ratio [Ben-David and Borodin 1994] and from the random order ratio [Kenyon 1996]. The new ratio is used to compare online algorithms directly by taking the ratio of their performances on their respective worst permutations of a worst-case sequence. Two variants of the bin packing problem are considered: the classical bin packing problem, where the goal is to fit all items in as few bins as possible, and the dual bin packing problem, which is the problem of maximizing the number of items packed in a fixed number of bins. Several known algorithms are compared using this new measure, and a new, simple variant of first-fit is proposed for dual bin packing. Many of our results are consistent with those previously obtained with the competitive ratio or the competitive ratio on accommodating sequences, but new separations and easier proofs are found. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]