Randomized algorithms for on-line scheduling problems: how low can't you go?

Stougie, Leen; Vestjens, Arjen P. A.

doi:10.1016/s0167-6377(01)00115-8

Cited by 28 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, this is optimal [10]. The best randomized algorithm is e/(e−1) competitive [6] and this is optimal [15]. In the multiprocessor setting (without preemption) the best algorithm is 2.89 competitive [4,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Minimizing total flow time and total completion time with immediate dispatching

Avrahami

Azar

2003

Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Minimizing total flow time and total completion time with immediate dispatching

Avrahami

Azar

2003

Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, this is optimal [10]. The best randomized algorithm is e/(e − 1) competitive [6] and this is optimal [16]. In the multiprocessor setting (without preemption) the best algorithm is 2 competitive [15], [4], [9].…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Minimizing Total Flow Time and Total Completion Time with Immediate Dispatching

Avrahami

Azar

2007

Algorithmica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Using randomization, it is possible to give an algorithm of competitive ratio e/(e − 1) ≈ 1.582 [2] which is optimal [11]. Vestjens showed a lower bound of 1.112 for deterministic algorithms that can restart jobs [13].…”

Section: Known Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%