1996
DOI: 10.1006/jagm.1996.0027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Derandomization in Computational Geometry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 123 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The general VC-dimension theory only guarantees the existence of 1/r-nets of size O(r log r), where the constant factor is a fast-growing function of the dimension (see e.g. [15,10,11]). …”
Section: Lemma 2 Let a Be An -Approximation To X Let B Be A δ-Appromentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The general VC-dimension theory only guarantees the existence of 1/r-nets of size O(r log r), where the constant factor is a fast-growing function of the dimension (see e.g. [15,10,11]). …”
Section: Lemma 2 Let a Be An -Approximation To X Let B Be A δ-Appromentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A suitable concept here is that of -net (see e.g. [15,10,11]). As before, let X be a finite set of points in R d , and an arbitrary real number, 0 ≤ ≤ 1.…”
Section: Theorem 1 Let X Be a Set Of N Points Inmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A final technicality is the proof of appropriate sampling bounds for the sizes of the chain-conflict lists of our conformal decomposition: such bounds are known under locality or monotonicity properties that our decomposition does not satisfy [1,9,11,22,24]. Fortunately, we can prove appropriate bounds using the fact that, although the faces in the decomposition do not satisfy a locality property, they are chosen from a relatively small "pool" of candidates that satisfy a locality property.…”
Section: O U R R E S U L T Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2). Such a bound can be proved in the framework of configuration spaces, when certain locality [9,24] or monotonicity [11,1] properties hold for the decomposition induced by the sample (see [22] for a survey), but neither of these properties hold for our chain-trapezoidation. Fortunately, we can prove a weaker bound that is only a factor O(f(log A)) larger, and that suffices to verify that our algorithm has expected linear running time.…”
Section: Sampling Boundsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also give a randomized algorithm that computes, for an input of n disjoint disks, a 1 r -cutting of size O(r 2 ) in polynomial expected time. It can be derandomized with standard techniques [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%