Amortized efficiency of list update and paging rules
Communications of the ACM
Competitive algorithms for server problems
Journal of Algorithms
An optimal on-line algorithm for K-servers on trees
SIAM Journal on Computing
Journal of Algorithms
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Online computation and competitive analysis
Online computation and competitive analysis
Competitive analysis of randomized paging algorithms
Theoretical Computer Science
Trackless online algorithms for the server problem
Information Processing Letters - Special issue analytical theory of fuzzy control with applications
On-line paging against adversarially biased random inputs
Journal of Algorithms
Limited bookmark randomized online algorithms for the paging problem
Information Processing Letters
SIAM Journal on Computing
SIGACT news online algorithms column 2
ACM SIGACT News
Online distributed object migration
WAOA'06 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Approximation and Online Algorithms
ONLINEMIN: a fast strongly competitive randomized paging algorithm
WAOA'11 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Approximation and Online Algorithms
Improved space bounds for strongly competitive randomized paging algorithms
ICALP'13 Proceedings of the 40th international conference on Automata, Languages, and Programming - Volume Part I
Distributed Online Algorithms for the Agent Migration Problem in WSNs
Mobile Networks and Applications
Hi-index | 5.23 |
We address the tradeoff between the competitive ratio and the resources used by randomized on-line algorithms for caching. Two algorithms reported in the literature that achieve the optimal ratio Hk require a lot of memory and perform extensive computation at each step. On the other hand, a very simple algorithm called RMARK has competitive ratio 2Hk -- 1, within a factor of 2 of the optimum. A natural question that arises here is whether there is a tradeoff between simplicity and the competitive ratio. In particular, is it possible to achieve a competitive ratio better than 2Hk - 1 with a simple algorithm like RMARK?We first consider marking algorithms that are natural generalizations of RMARK, and we prove that, for any ε 0, there is no randomized marking algorithm for caching with competitive ratio (2 - ε)Hk. Thus RMARK is essentially optimal among marking algorithms.Another model of simple caching algorithms is that of trackless algorithms. These are algorithms that do not store any information about items that are not in the cache. It is known that, for k = 2, there is no randomized trackless algorithm for caching with ratio better than 37/24;≈ 1.5416; The trivial upper bound is 2, achieved even by deterministic algorithms LRU and FIFO. We reduce this gap by giving a trackless randomized algorithm with competitive ratio 1/4(3 + √13) ≈ 1.6514.