Approximating Weighted Tree Augmentation via Chvátal-Gomory Cuts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The weighted tree augmentation problem (WTAP) is a fundamental network design problem. We are given an undirected tree G = (V, E) with n = |V| nodes, an additional set of edges L called links and a cost vector . The goal is to choose a minimum cost subset S ⊆ L such that G = (V, E ∪ S) is 2-edgeconnected. In the unweighted case, that is, when we have cℓ = 1 for all ℓ ∊ L, the problem is called the tree augmentation problem (TAP). Both problems are known to be APX-hard, and the best known approximation factors are 2 for WTAP by (Frederickson and JáJá, ’81) and for TAP due to (Kortsarz and Nutov, TALG ’16). Adjashvili (SODA ’17) recently presented an ≈ 1.96418 + ε-approximation algorithm for WTAP for the case where all link costs are bounded by a constant. This is the first approximation with a better guarantee than 2 that does not require restrictions on the structure of the tree or the links. In this paper, we improve Adjiashvili's approximation to a + ε-approximation for WTAP under the bounded cost assumption. We achieve this by introducing a strong LP that combines {0, ½}-Chvátal-Gomory cuts for the standard LP for the problem with bundle constraints from Adjiashvili. We show that our LP can be solved efficiently and that it is exact for some instances that arise at the core of Adjiashvili's approach. This results in the improved performance guarantee of + ε, which is asymptotically on par with the result by Kortsarz and Nutov. Our result also is the best-known LP-relative approximation algorithm for TAP.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".