计算复杂性 (Fall 2018) and 高级算法 (Fall 2018)/Problem Set 1: Difference between pages
imported>TCSseminar |
imported>TCSseminar No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Problem 1== | |||
Recall that in class we show by the probabilistic method how to deduce a <math>\frac{n(n-1)}{2}</math> upper bound on the number of distinct min-cuts in any multigraph <math>G</math> with <math>n</math> vertices from the <math>\frac{2}{n(n-1)}</math> lower bound for success probability of Karger's min-cut algorithm. | |||
< | |||
Also recall that the <math>FastCut</math> algorithm taught in class guarantees to return a min-cut with probability at least <math>\Omega(1/\log n)</math>. Does this imply a much tighter <math>O(\log n)</math> upper bound on the number of distinct min-cuts in any multigraph <math>G</math> with <math>n</math> vertices? Prove your improved upper bound if your answer is "yes", and give a satisfactory explanation if your answer is "no". | |||
== Problem 2 == | |||
Two ''rooted'' trees <math>T_1</math> and <math>T_2</math> are said to be '''isomorphic''' if there exists a bijection <math>\phi</math> that maps vertices of <math>T_1</math> to those of <math>T_2</math> satisfying the following condition: for each ''internal'' vertex <math>v</math> of <math>T_1</math> with children <math>u_1,u_2,\ldots, u_k</math>, the set of children of vertex <math>\phi(v)</math> in <math>T_2</math> is precisely <math>\{\phi(u_1), \phi(u_2),\ldots,\phi(u_k)\}</math>, no ordering among children assumed. | |||
Give an efficient randomized algorithm with bounded one-sided error (false positive), for testing isomorphism between rooted trees with <math>n</math> vertices. Analyze your algorithm. | |||
== Problem 3 == | |||
= | Fix a universe <math>U</math> and two subset <math>A,B \subseteq U</math>, both with size <math>n</math>. we create both Bloom filters <math>F_A</math>(<math>F_B</math>) for <math>A</math> (<math>B</math>), using the same number of bits <math> m</math> and the same <math>k</math> hash functions. | ||
*Let <math>F_C = F_A \and F_B</math> be the Bloom filter formed by computing the bitwise AND of <math>F_A</math> and <math>F_B</math>. Argue that <math>F_C</math> may not always be the same as the Bloom filter that are created for <math>A\cap B </math>. | |||
*Bloom filters can be used to estimate set differences. Express the expected number of bits where <math>F_A</math> and <math>F_B</math> differ as a function of <math>m, n, k</math> and <math>|A\cap B|</math>. | |||
= | |||
* | |||
* | |||
Revision as of 17:37, 18 September 2018
Problem 1
Recall that in class we show by the probabilistic method how to deduce a [math]\displaystyle{ \frac{n(n-1)}{2} }[/math] upper bound on the number of distinct min-cuts in any multigraph [math]\displaystyle{ G }[/math] with [math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math] vertices from the [math]\displaystyle{ \frac{2}{n(n-1)} }[/math] lower bound for success probability of Karger's min-cut algorithm.
Also recall that the [math]\displaystyle{ FastCut }[/math] algorithm taught in class guarantees to return a min-cut with probability at least [math]\displaystyle{ \Omega(1/\log n) }[/math]. Does this imply a much tighter [math]\displaystyle{ O(\log n) }[/math] upper bound on the number of distinct min-cuts in any multigraph [math]\displaystyle{ G }[/math] with [math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math] vertices? Prove your improved upper bound if your answer is "yes", and give a satisfactory explanation if your answer is "no".
Problem 2
Two rooted trees [math]\displaystyle{ T_1 }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ T_2 }[/math] are said to be isomorphic if there exists a bijection [math]\displaystyle{ \phi }[/math] that maps vertices of [math]\displaystyle{ T_1 }[/math] to those of [math]\displaystyle{ T_2 }[/math] satisfying the following condition: for each internal vertex [math]\displaystyle{ v }[/math] of [math]\displaystyle{ T_1 }[/math] with children [math]\displaystyle{ u_1,u_2,\ldots, u_k }[/math], the set of children of vertex [math]\displaystyle{ \phi(v) }[/math] in [math]\displaystyle{ T_2 }[/math] is precisely [math]\displaystyle{ \{\phi(u_1), \phi(u_2),\ldots,\phi(u_k)\} }[/math], no ordering among children assumed.
Give an efficient randomized algorithm with bounded one-sided error (false positive), for testing isomorphism between rooted trees with [math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math] vertices. Analyze your algorithm.
Problem 3
Fix a universe [math]\displaystyle{ U }[/math] and two subset [math]\displaystyle{ A,B \subseteq U }[/math], both with size [math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math]. we create both Bloom filters [math]\displaystyle{ F_A }[/math]([math]\displaystyle{ F_B }[/math]) for [math]\displaystyle{ A }[/math] ([math]\displaystyle{ B }[/math]), using the same number of bits [math]\displaystyle{ m }[/math] and the same [math]\displaystyle{ k }[/math] hash functions.
- Let [math]\displaystyle{ F_C = F_A \and F_B }[/math] be the Bloom filter formed by computing the bitwise AND of [math]\displaystyle{ F_A }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ F_B }[/math]. Argue that [math]\displaystyle{ F_C }[/math] may not always be the same as the Bloom filter that are created for [math]\displaystyle{ A\cap B }[/math].
- Bloom filters can be used to estimate set differences. Express the expected number of bits where [math]\displaystyle{ F_A }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ F_B }[/math] differ as a function of [math]\displaystyle{ m, n, k }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ |A\cap B| }[/math].