scholarly journals General Compact Labeling Schemes for Dynamic Trees

2005 ◽  
pp. 457-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amos Korman
Keyword(s):  
Labeling Schemes ◽  
Dynamic Trees

scholarly journals General compact labeling schemes for dynamic trees

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 179-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amos Korman
Keyword(s):  
Labeling Schemes ◽  
Dynamic Trees

Compact separator decompositions in dynamic trees and applications to labeling schemes

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amos Korman ◽  
David Peleg
Keyword(s):  
Labeling Schemes ◽  
Dynamic Trees

scholarly journals Labeling schemes for weighted dynamic trees

2007 ◽  
Vol 205 (12) ◽  
pp. 1721-1740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amos Korman ◽  
David Peleg
Keyword(s):  
Labeling Schemes ◽  
Dynamic Trees

Dynamic Trees and Dynamic Point Location

1998 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 612-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Goodrich ◽  
Roberto Tamassia
Keyword(s):  
Point Location ◽  
Dynamic Trees

Dynamic Trees

2016 ◽  
pp. 605-609
Author(s):  
Renato F. Werneck
Keyword(s):  
Dynamic Trees

scholarly journals Dynamic and Multi-Functional Labeling Schemes

2014 ◽  
pp. 141-153
Author(s):  
Søren Dahlgaard ◽  
Mathias Bæk Tejs Knudsen ◽  
Noy Rotbart
Keyword(s):  
Labeling Schemes

ONLINE SCHEDULING OF DYNAMIC TREES

1995 ◽  
Vol 05 (04) ◽  
pp. 635-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL A. PALIS ◽  
JING-CHIOU LIOU ◽  
SANGUTHEVAR RAJASEKARAN ◽  
SUNIL SHENDE ◽  
DAVID S.L. WEI
Keyword(s):  
Lower Bound ◽  
Competitive Ratio ◽  
Scheduling Algorithm ◽  
Optimal Schedule ◽  
Online Scheduling ◽  
The Other ◽  
Static Case ◽  
Scheduling Problem ◽  
Dynamic Trees ◽  
Dynamic Tree

The scheduling problem for dynamic tree-structured task graphs is studied and is shown to be inherently more difficult than the static case. It is shown that any online scheduling algorithm, deterministic or randomized, has competitive ratio Ω((1/g)/ log d(1/g)) for trees with granularity g and degree at most d. On the other hand, it is known that static trees with arbitrary granularity can be scheduled to within twice the optimal schedule. It is also shown that the lower bound is tight: there is a deterministic online tree scheduling algorithm that has competitive ratio O((1/g)/ log d(1/g)). Thus, randomization does not help.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document