Improved Polynomial-Time Approximations for Clustering with Minimum Sum of Radii or Diameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We give an improved approximation algorithm for two related clustering problems. In the Minimum Sum of Radii clustering problem (MSR), we are to select k balls in a metric space to cover all points while minimizing the sum of the radii of these balls. In the Minimum Sum of Diameters clustering problem (MSD), we are to simply partition the points of a metric space into k parts while minimizing the sum of the diameters of these parts. We present a 3.389-approximation for MSR and a 6.546-approximation for MSD, improving over their respective 3.504 and 7.008 approximations developed by Charikar and Panigrahy (2001). In particular, our guarantee for MSD is better than twice our guarantee for MSR. Our approach refines a so-called bipoint rounding procedure of Charikar and Panigrahy’s algorithm by considering centering balls at some points that were not necessarily centers in the bipoint solution. This added versatility enables the analysis of our improved approximation guarantees. We also provide an alternative approach to finding the bipoint solution using a straightforward LP rounding procedure rather than a primal-dual algorithm.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".