Weighted capacitated, priority, and geometric set cover via improved quasi-uniform sampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The minimum-weight set cover problem is widely known to be O(log n)-approximable, with no improvement possible in the general case. We take the approach of exploiting problem structure to achieve better results, by providing a geometry-inspired algorithm whose approximation guarantee depends solely on an instance-specific combinatorial property known as shallow cell complexity (SCC). Roughly speaking, a set cover instance has low SCC if any column-induced submatrix of the corresponding element-set incidence matrix has few distinct rows. By adapting and improving Varadarajan’s recent quasi-uniform random sampling method for weighted geometric covering problems, we obtain strong approximation algorithms for a structurally rich class of weighted covering problems with low SCC. We also show how to derandomize our algorithm. Our main result has several immediate consequences. Among them, we settle an open question of Chakrabarty et al. [8] by showing that weighted instances of the capacitated covering problem with underlying network structure have O(1)-approximations. Additionally, our improvements to Varadarajan’s sampling framework yield several new results for weighted geometric set cover, hitting set, and dominating set problems. In particular, for weighted covering problems exhibiting linear (or near-linear) union complexity, we obtain approximability results agreeing with those known for the unweighted case. For example, we obtain a constant approximation for the weighted disk cover problem, improving upon the 2 O(log ∗ n)-approximation known prior to our work and matching the O(1)approximation known for the unweighted variant.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".