mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Prioritized Metric Structures and Embedding

arXiv 1502.05543 ↗First posted 19 Feb 2015cs.DScited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Metric data structures (distance oracles, distance labeling schemes, routing schemes) and low-distortion embeddings provide a powerful algorithmic methodology, which has been successfully applied for approximation algorithms citellr, online algorithms citeBBMN11, distributed algorithms citeKKMPT12 and for computing sparsifiers citeST04. However, this methodology appears to have a limitation: the worst-case performance inherently depends on the cardinality of the metric, and one could not specify in advance which vertices/points should enjoy a better service (i.e., stretch/distortion, label size/dimension) than that given by the worst-case guarantee. In this paper we alleviate this limitation by devising a suit of em prioritized metric data structures and embeddings. We show that given a priority ranking (x1,x2,ldots,xn) of the graph vertices (respectively, metric points) one can devise a metric data structure (respectively, embedding) in which the stretch (resp., distortion) incurred by any pair containing a vertex xj will depend on the rank j of the vertex. We also show that other important parameters, such as the label size and (in some sense) the dimension, may depend only on j. In some of our metric data structures (resp., embeddings) we achieve both prioritized stretch (resp., distortion) and label size (resp., dimension) em simultaneously. The worst-case performance of our metric data structures and embeddings is typically asymptotically no worse than of their non-prioritized counterparts.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2015.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1.

1 paper.