惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

D
Docker
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
博客园 - 叶小钗
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
博客园 - 司徒正美
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
博客园 - Franky
爱范儿
爱范儿
罗磊的独立博客
IT之家
IT之家
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
N
Netflix TechBlog - Medium
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
P
Proofpoint News Feed
U
Unit 42
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
H
Help Net Security
博客园_首页
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理

cs.DS updates on arXiv.org

PAC Learning with Bandit Feedback: Sharp Sample Complexity in the Realizable Setting Algorithms with Polynomially-Improved Approximation Factors for the $2 \rightarrow q$ Norm, and Applications A computational phase transition for learning-to-sample from Ising models Covering vertices by sequential stars Fermi-Dirac machines as quantizations of neurons A Comprehensive Evaluation of Vertex Elimination Algorithms for Algorithmic Differentiation A Tight Bound on Localization of Electrical Flows Optimal Dimension-Free Sampling for Regularized Classification Reducing the Randomness in Partition Oracles for Bounded Degree Minor-Free Graphs Beyond the Half-Approximation: Fair and Efficient Online Class Matching Efficient Uniform Sampling of Surjections via their Profiles Tractable Maximization of Budgeted Phylogenetic Diversity on Networks Utilizing Node Scanwidth Fairness in Aggregation: Optimal Top-$k$ and Improved Full Ranking Learning-Augmented Online Scheduling with Parsimonious Preemption Entropy Equivalence Testing Lumberjack: Better Differentially Private Random Forests through Heavy Hitter Detection in Trees The Secretary Problem with a Stochastic Precursor Polynomial-Time Robust Multiclass Linear Classification under Gaussian Marginals Efficient Banzhaf-Based Data Valuation for $k$-Nearest Neighbors Classification Block-Sphere Vector Quantization An Approximation Algorithm for Graph Label Selection Iterative Chow Filtering for Learning with Distribution Shift Complexity of Non-Log-Concave Sampling in Fisher Information Stochastic Matching via Local Sparsification Finite Sample Bounds for Learning with Score Matching What is Learnable in Valiant's Theory of the Learnable? Provable Quantization with Randomized Hadamard Transform Min-Max Optimization Requires Exponentially Many Queries Fast and Compact Graph Cuts for the Boykov-Kolmogorov Algorithm A proximal gradient algorithm for composite log-concave sampling
Fully Dynamic Set Cover: Worst-Case Recourse and Update Time
Sayan Bhattacharya, Ruoxu Cen, Debmalya Panigrahi · 2025-11-12 · via cs.DS updates on arXiv.org

In (fully) dynamic set cover, the goal is to maintain an approximately optimal solution to a dynamically evolving instance of set cover, where in each step either an element is added to or removed from the instance. The two main desiderata of a dynamic set cover algorithm are to minimize at each time-step, the recourse, which is the number of sets removed from or added to the solution, and the update time to compute the updated solution. This problem has been extensively studied over the last decade leading to many results that achieve ever-improving bounds on the recourse and update time, while maintaining a solution whose cost is comparable to that of offline approximation algorithms. In this paper, we give the first algorithms to simultaneously achieve non-trivial worst-case bounds for recourse and update time. Specifically, we give fully-dynamic set cover algorithms that simultaneously achieve $O(\log n)$ recourse and $f\cdot \textrm{poly}\log(n)$ update time in the worst-case, for both approximation regimes: $O(\log n)$ and $O(f)$ approximation. (Here, $n, f$ respectively denote the maximum number of elements and maximum frequency of an element across all instances.) Prior to our work, all results for this problem either settled for amortized bounds on recourse and update time, or obtained $f\cdot \textrm{poly}\log(n)$ update time in the worst-case but at the cost of $Ω(m)$ worst-case recourse. (Here, $m$ denotes the number of sets. Note that any algorithm has recourse at most $m$.)