Minimum-Norm Load Balancing Is (Almost) as Easy as Minimizing Makespan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the minimum-norm load-balancing (MinNormLB) problem, wherein there are n jobs, each of which needs to be assigned to one of m machines, and we are given the processing times {p_{ij}} of the jobs on the machines. We also have a monotone, symmetric norm f:ℝ^m → ℝ_{≥ 0}. We seek an assignment σ of jobs to machines that minimizes the f-norm of the induced load vector load->_σ ∈ ℝ_{≥ 0}^m, where load_σ(i) = ∑_{j:σ(j) = i}p_{ij}. This problem was introduced by [Deeparnab Chakrabarty and Chaitanya Swamy, 2019], and the current-best result for MinNormLB is a (4+ε)-approximation [Deeparnab Chakrabarty and Chaitanya Swamy, 2019]. In the stochastic version of MinNormLB, the job processing times are given by nonnegative random variables X_{ij}, and jobs are independent; the goal is to find an assignment σ that minimizes the expected f-norm of the induced random load vector. We obtain results that (essentially) match the best-known guarantees for deterministic makespan minimization (MinNormLB with 𝓁_∞ norm). For MinNormLB, we obtain a (2+ε)-approximation for unrelated machines, and a PTAS for identical machines. For stochastic MinNormLB, we consider the setting where the X_{ij}s are Poisson random variables, denoted PoisNormLB. Our main result here is a novel and powerful reduction showing that, for any machine environment (e.g., unrelated/identical machines), any α-approximation algorithm for MinNormLB in that machine environment yields a randomized α(1+ε)-approximation for PoisNormLB in that machine environment. Combining this with our results for MinNormLB, we immediately obtain a (2+ε)-approximation for PoisNormLB on unrelated machines, and a PTAS for PoisNormLB on identical machines. The latter result substantially generalizes a PTAS for makespan minimization with Poisson jobs obtained recently by [Anindya De et al., 2020].
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".