Every Deterministic Nonclairvoyant Scheduler has a Suboptimal Load Threshold
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal is to prove a surprising lower bound for resource augmented nonclairvoyant algorithms for scheduling jobs with sublinear nondecreasing speed-up curves on multiple processors with the objective of average response time. Edmonds and Pruhs in SODA09 prove that for every $\e > 0$, there is an algorithm $\alg_{\e}$ that is $(1\!+\!\epsilon)$-speed $O({1 \over \e2})$-competitive. A problem, however, is that this algorithm $\alg_{\e}$ depends on $\e$. The goal is to prove that every fixed deterministic nonclairvoyant algorithm has a suboptimal speed threshold, namely for every (graceful) algorithm $\alg$, there is a threshold $1\!+\!\beta_{\alg}$ that is $\beta_{\alg} > 0$ away from being optimal such that the algorithm is $\Omega({1 \over \e \beta_{\alg}})$ competitive with speed $(1 \!+\! \beta_{\alg}) \!+\! \e$ and is $\omega(1)$ competitive with speed $1 \!+\! \beta_{\alg}$. I have worked very hard on it and have felt that I was close. The proof technique is to use Brouwer's fixed point theorem to break the cycle of needing to know which input will be given before one can know what the algorithm will do and needing to know what the algorithm will do before one can know which input to give. Every thing I have can be found at
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".