高级算法 (Fall 2021)/Problem Set 1: Difference between revisions

From TCS Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>TCSseminar
(Created page with "*每道题目的解答都要有<font color="red" size=5>完整的解题过程</font>。中英文不限。 == Problem 1 == == Problem 2 ==")
 
imported>TCSseminar
Line 2: Line 2:


== Problem 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 ==
== Problem 2 ==

Revision as of 06:29, 12 September 2021

  • 每道题目的解答都要有完整的解题过程。中英文不限。

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