1 / 19

Min-Max Coverage in Multi-Interface Networks

Min-Max Coverage in Multi-Interface Networks. Gianlorenzo D’Angelo, Gabriele Di Stefano Dept . Electrical and Information Engineering University of L’Aquila, Italy { gianlorenzo.dangelo , gabriele.distefano}@ing.univaq.it Alfredo Navarra Dept . Mathematics and Computer Science

ania
Download Presentation

Min-Max Coverage in Multi-Interface Networks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Min-Max Coverage in Multi-Interface Networks Gianlorenzo D’Angelo, Gabriele Di Stefano Dept. Electrical and Information Engineering Universityof L’Aquila, Italy {gianlorenzo.dangelo, gabriele.distefano}@ing.univaq.it Alfredo Navarra Dept. Mathematics and Computer Science Universityof Perugia, Italy navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  2. Outline • Introduction and Motivations • The Model • Coverage problem • Explanatory example • Obtained results • Hardness • Approximation • Special cases • Conclusion Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  3. Introduction & Motivation • Heterogeneous Networks • Multi-Interface (multi-frequencies) devices • Limited power (both computational and battery) • Required services/connections Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  4. The Multi-Interface Model • Given a graph G = (V,E) with |V | = n and |E| = m, which models a set of wireless devices (nodes V) connected by multiple radio interfaces (edges E), the aim is to switch on a minimum cost set of interfaces at each node in order to satisfy some required connections • A connection is satisfied when the endpoints of the corresponding edge share at least one active interface • Every node holds a subset of all the possible k interfaces • k might be set a priori (bounded case) • k might depend on the given instance (unbounded case) • The cost of maintaining an active interface is considered (cost in terms of power percentage required by an interface) • unit cost (i.e., the same for all the interfaces) • non-unit cost (i.e., each type of interface has its own cost) Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  5. Min-Max Coverage, MMCC • Definition 1. A function W : V→2{1,…,k} is said to coverG=(V,E) if for each {u,v} in E, the set W(u)∩ W(v)≠Ø. Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  6. Example, MMCC costs : .6 : .75 : 1.2 : 1.4 : 1.8 : 2 : 3.1 + + = 3.35 Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  7. Cheaper solution + = 2.6 Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  8. MMCC, complexity Theorem 1. MMCC is NP-hard even when restricted to the bounded unit cost case, for any fixed Δ ≥ 5 and k ≥ 16. Sketch: Polynomial transformation from Satisfiability (with at most 3 literals for each clause and a variable appears, negated or not, in at most 3 clauses) to the underlying decisional problem of MMCC (bounding the cost to B=3). Example: q = (¬u + v + w), r = (v + ¬z), s= (v+¬w + z), Correspondtographwith: W(eq) = {Fu, Tv, Tw}, W(er) = {Tv, Fz}, W(es) = {Tv, Fw, Tz}, W(dq)={Tu, Fu, Tv, Fv, Tw, Fw}, W(au)={Tu, Fu, B, C} ··· Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  9. MMCC, complexity • Theorem 2. In the unitcostcase withk ≤ 3, MMCC is optimally solvable in O(m) time. • Sketch: One interface is shared by all the nodes, or each node activates at most 2 interfaces (it is sufficient to check whether nodes with 3 interfaces can be connected with the nodes holding less interfaces by means of only 2 interfaces), or at least one node must activates 3 interfaces. • Theorem 3. If the input graph is a tree and k = O(1) or Δ = O(1), MMCC can be optimally solved in O(n)or O(k2Δn) time, respectively. • (DynamicProgrammingtechnique) • Theorem 4. If the input graphis a cycle, MMCC is optimally solved in O(k6n) time. Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  10. MMCC, approximation • Theorem 5. Unless P = NP, MMCC in the unit cost unbounded case cannot be approximated within an η ln(Δ) factor for a certain constant η, even when the input graph is a tree. • Proof (sketch from COCOA’10): • reduction from Set Cover (SC)to MMCC • the input graph is a star of n+1 nodes • each node but the center encodes one element of SC • each subset from SC is encoded by one interface • the center holds all the interfaces • (it results that all the nodes reachable from the center by means of a specific interface represent one subset of SC) Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  11. MMCC, approximation Theorem 6. In the unit cost case, MMCC is k/2-approximable in O(n) time. Theorem 7. In the unit cost case MMCC is Δ/2-approximable in O(n+m) time. Theorem 8. Let I beaninstanceof MMCC where the input graphadmits a b-boundedownershipfunction, thenthereexistsanalgorithmwhichguaranteesa (ln(Δ)+1+ b · min{ln(Δ)+1, cmax})-approximation factor, with cmax = maxi∈{1,...k} c(i). Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  12. MMCC, approximation Given a graph G = (V,E), an ownership function Own : E → V assigns each edge {u, v} to an owner node between u or v. The set of nodes connected to node u by the edges owned by uis Own′(u) = {v | Own({u, v}) = u}. Function Own is said to be b-bounded if |Own′(u)| ≤ b foreachu ∈ V. Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  13. Conclusion • We have considered the Min-Max Coverage problem in Multi-Interface Networks studying hardness and approximation factors in general and more specific settings • Other interesting variations deserve investigation • Further work includes the improvement of the achieved results and the challenging study of the distributed version of the problem • practical heuristics and experimental studies might be a first step • collaborative or selfish environments Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  14. Thank You! Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  15. Referencies • Caporuscio M., Charlet D., Issarny V., Navarra A.: Energetic Performance of Service-oriented Multi-radio Networks: Issues and Perspectives. In 6th Int. Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP), ACM Press, 42—45, 2007 • Klasing R., Kosowski A., Navarra A.: Cost minimisation in multi-interface networks. In 1st EuroFGI Int. Conf. on Network Control and Optimization (NetCooP). Volume 4465 of LNCS, Springer, 276—285, 2007 • Kosowski A., Navarra A.: Cost minimisation in unbounded multi-interface networks. In 2nd PPAM Workshop on Scheduling for Parallel Computing (SPC). Volume 4967 of LNCS, Springer 1039—1047, 2007 • Kosowski A., Navarra A., Pinotti M. C.: Connectivity in Multi-Interface Networks. In 4th Symp. on Trustworthy Global Computing (TGC). LNCS 5474, Springer, pp. 157—170, 2008 • Barsi F., Navarra A., Pinotti M. C.: Cheapest Paths in Multi-Interface Networks. In 10th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing and Networking (ICDCN). LNCS 5408, Springer, pp. 37—42, 2009 • Athanassopoulos S., Caragiannis I., Kaklamanis C., Papaioannou E.: Energy-efficient communication in multi-interface wireless networks. In 34th Int. Symp. on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS), LNCS 5743, Springer 102–111, 2009 • Klasing R., Kosowski A., Navarra A.: Cost minimisation in wireless networks with bounded and unbounded number of interfaces. In Networks, Vol. 54(1), pp. 12—19, 2009 • Kosowski A., Navarra A., Pinotti, M.C.: Exploiting Multi-Interface Networks: Connectivity and Cheapest Paths. InWireless Networks. Vol. 16(4), pp. 1063—1073, 2010 • D’Angelo G., Di Stefano G., Navarra A.: Minimizing the Maximum Duty for Connectivity in Multi-Interface Networks, In 4th Int. Conf. on Combinatorial Optimization and Applications (COCOA). LNCS 6509, Springer 254-267, 2010 • D’Angelo G., Di Stefano G., Navarra A.: Min-Max Coverage in Multi-Interface Networks, In 37th Int. Conf. on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Computer Science (SOFSEM). LNCS 6543, Springer 190-201, 2011 • D’Angelo G., Di Stefano G., Navarra A.: Bandwidth Constrained Multi-Interface Networks, In 37th Int. Conf. on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Computer Science (SOFSEM). LNCS 6543, Springer 202-213, 2011 • D’Angelo G., Di Stefano G., Navarra A.: Maximum Flow and Minimum-Cost Flow in Multi-Interface Networks, In 5th Int. Conf. on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication (ICUIMC), 2011 • Bertossi A., Navarra A., Pinotti M.C.: Maximum Bandwidth Broadcast in Single and Multi-Interface Networks, In 5th Int. Conf. on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication (ICUIMC), 2011

  16. MMCC, approximation Given a graph G = (V,E), an ownership function Own : E → V assigns each edge {u, v} to an owner node between u or v. The set of nodes connected to node u by the edges owned by u is Own′(u) = {v | Own({u, v}) = u}. Function Own is said to be b-bounded if |Own′(u)| ≤ b foreachu ∈ V. The genus of a graph is the minimum number of handles that must be added to the plane to embed the graph without any crossings Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  17. MMCC, approximation Given a graph G = (V,E), an ownership function Own : E → V assigns each edge {u, v} to an owner node between u or v. The set of nodes connected to node u by the edges owned by u is Own′(u) = {v | Own({u, v}) = u}. Function Own is said to be b-bounded if |Own′(u)| ≤ b foreachu ∈ V. The arboricity of an undirected graph is the minimum number of forest into which its edges can be partitioned. Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  18. MMCC, approximation Given a graph G = (V,E), an ownership function Own : E → V assigns each edge {u, v} to an owner node between u or v. The set of nodes connected to node u by the edges owned by u is Own′(u) = {v | Own({u, v}) = u}. Function Own is said to be b-bounded if |Own′(u)| ≤ b foreachu ∈ V. The pagenumber of a graph is the minimum number of pages required to embed the graph in a book, i.e., if the vertices are rearranged along the spine of a book, the pagenumber is the number of pages required to draw the edges without crossing. Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

  19. MMCC, approximation Given a graph G = (V,E), an ownership function Own : E → V assigns each edge {u, v} to an owner node between u or v. The set of nodes connected to node u by the edges owned by u is Own′(u) = {v | Own({u, v}) = u}. Function Own is said to be b-bounded if |Own′(u)| ≤ b foreachu ∈ V. The treewidth measures the number of graph vertices mapped onto any tree node in an optimal tree decomposition (i.e., a mapping of a graph into a tree). Alfredo Navarra,Universityof Perugia, Italy. navarra@dmi.unipg.it

More Related