A new approach to the maximum-flow problem
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
A fast parametric maximum flow algorithm and applications
SIAM Journal on Computing
A faster deterministic maximum flow algorithm
SODA selected papers from the third annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms
Improved Algorithms for Bipartite Network Flow
SIAM Journal on Computing
Beyond the flow decomposition barrier
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Mathematical Techniques for Efficient Record Segmentation in Large Shared Databases
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Balancing applied to maximum network flow problems
ESA'06 Proceedings of the 14th conference on Annual European Symposium - Volume 14
Finding dense and isolated submarkets in a sponsored search spending graph
Proceedings of the sixteenth ACM conference on Conference on information and knowledge management
On Total Variation Minimization and Surface Evolution Using Parametric Maximum Flows
International Journal of Computer Vision
Two-Level Push-Relabel Algorithm for the Maximum Flow Problem
AAIM '09 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Algorithmic Aspects in Information and Management
Hi-index | 0.00 |
The parametric maximum flow problem is an extension of the classical maximum flow problem in which the capacities of certain arcs are not fixed but are functions of a single parameter. Gallo et al. [6] showed that certain versions of the push-relabel algorithm for ordinary maximum flow can be extended to the parametric problem while only increasing the worst-case time bound by a constant factor. Recently Zhang et al. [14,13] proposed a novel, simple balancing algorithm for the parametric problem on bipartite networks. They claimed good performance for their algorithm on networks arising from a real-world application. We describe the results of an experimental study comparing the performance of the balancing algorithm, the GGT algorithm, and a simplified version of the GGT algorithm, on networks related to those of the application of Zhang et al. as well as networks designed to be hard for the balancing algorithm. Our implementation of the balancing algorithm beats both versions of the GGT algorithm on networks related to the application, thus supporting the observations of Zhang et al. On the other hand, the GGT algorithm is more robust; it beats the balancing algorithm on some natural networks, and by asymptotically increasing amount on networks designed to be hard for the balancing algorithm.