skip to main content
research-article

Online Stochastic Matching: : New Algorithms with Better Bounds

Published: 01 August 2014 Publication History

Abstract

We consider variants of the online stochastic bipartite matching problem motivated by Internet advertising display applications, as introduced in Feldman et al. [Feldman J, Mehta A, Mirrokni VS, Muthukrishnan S (2009) Online stochastic matching: Beating 1 − 1/e. FOCS '09: Proc. 50th Annual IEEE Sympos. Foundations Comput. Sci. (IEEE, Washington, DC), 117–126]. In this setting, advertisers express specific interests into requests for impressions of different types. Advertisers are fixed and known in advance, whereas requests for impressions come online. The task is to assign each request to an interested advertiser (or to discard it) immediately upon its arrival.
In the adversarial online model, the ranking algorithm of Karp et al. [Karp RM, Vazirani UV, Varirani VV (1990) An optimal algorithm for online bipartite matching. STOC '90: Proc. 22nd Annual ACM Sympos. Theory Comput. (ACM, New York), 352–358] provides a best possible randomized algorithm with competitive ratio 1 − 1/e ≈ 0.632.
In the stochastic i.i.d. model, when requests are drawn repeatedly and independently from a known probability distribution over the different impression types, Feldman et al. [Feldman J, Mehta A, Mirrokni VS, Muthukrishnan S (2009) Online stochastic matching: Beating 1 − 1/e. FOCS '09: Proc. 50th Annual IEEE Sympos. Foundations Comput. Sci. (IEEE, Washington, DC), 117–126] prove that one can do better than 1 − 1/e. Under the restriction that the expected number of request of each impression type is an integer, they provide a 0.670-competitive algorithm, later improved by Bahmani and Kapralov [Bahmani B, Kapralov M (2010) Improved bounds for online stochastic matching. ESA '10: Proc. 22nd Annual Eur. Sympos. Algorithms (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg), 170–181] to 0.699 and by Manshadi et al. [Manshadi V, Gharan SO, Saberi A (2012) Online stochastic matching: Online actions based on offline statistics. Math. Oper. Res. 37(4):559–573] to 0.705. Without this integrality restriction, Manshadi et al. are able to provide a 0.702-competitive algorithm.
In this paper we consider a general class of online algorithms for the i.i.d. model that improve on all these bounds and that use computationally efficient offline procedures (based on the solution of simple linear programs of maximum flow types). Under the integrality restriction on the expected number of impression types, we get a 1 − 2e−2(≈0.729)-competitive algorithm. Without this restriction, we get a 0.706-competitive algorithm.
Our techniques can also be applied to other related problems such as the online stochastic vertex-weighted bipartite matching problem as defined in Aggarwal et al. [Aggarwal G, Goel G, Karande C, Mehta A (2011) Online vertex-weighted bipartite matching and single-bid budgeted allocations. SODA '11: Proc. 22nd Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (SIAM, Philadelphia), 1253–1264]. For this problem, we obtain a 0.725-competitive algorithm under the stochastic i.i.d. model with integral arrival rate.
Finally, we show the validity of all our results under a Poisson arrival model, removing the need to assume that the total number of arrivals is fixed and known in advance, as is required for the analysis of the stochastic i.i.d. models described above.

References

[1]
Aggarwal G, Goel G, Karande C, Mehta A (2011) Online vertex-weighted bipartite matching and single-bid budgeted allocations. SODA '11: Proc. 22nd Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (SIAM, Philadelphia), 1253–1264.
[2]
Agrawal S, Wang Z, Ye Y (2009) A dynamic near-optimal algorithm for online linear programming. Working paper, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
[3]
Bahmani B, Kapralov M (2010) Improved bounds for online stochastic matching. ESA '10: Proc. 22nd Annual Eur. Sympos. Algorithms (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg), 170–181.
[4]
Buchbinder N, Jain K, Naor S (2007) Online primal-dual algorithms for maximizing ad-auctions revenue. ESA '07: Proc. 15th Annual Eur. Sympos. Algorithms (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg), 253–264.
[5]
Devanur NR, Hayes TP (2009) The AdWords problem: Online keyword matching with budgeted bidders under random permutations. EC '09: Proc. 10th ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (ACM, New York), 71–78.
[6]
Feldman J, Mehta A, Mirrokni VS, Muthukrishnan S (2009) Online stochastic matching: Beating 1 − 1/e. FOCS '09: Proc. 50th Annual IEEE Sympos. Foundations Comput. Sci. (IEEE, Washington, DC), 117–126.
[7]
Goel G, Mehta A (2008) Online budgeted matching in random input models with applications to AdWords. SODA '08: Proc. 19th Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (SIAM, Philadelphia), 982–991.
[8]
Haeupler B, Mirrokni V, Zadimoghaddam M (2011) Online stochastic weighted matching: Improved approximation algorithms. WINE '11: Workshop of Network and Internet Econom. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg), 170–181.
[9]
Kalyanasundaram B, Pruhs KR (2000) An optimal deterministic algorithm for online b-matching. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 233(1–2):319–325.
[10]
Karande C, Mehta A, Tripathi P (2011) Online bipartite matching with unknown distributions. STOC '11: Proc. 43rd Annual ACM Sympos. Theory Comput. (ACM, New York), 587–596.
[11]
Karp RM, Vazirani UV, Varirani VV (1990) An optimal algorithm for online bipartite matching. STOC '90: Proc. 22nd Annual ACM Sympos. Theory Comput. (ACM, New York), 352–358.
[12]
Mahdian M, Yan Q (2011) Online bipartite matching with random arrivals: An approach based on strongly factor-revealing LPS. STOC '11: Proc. 43rd Annual ACM Sympos. Theory Comput. (ACM, New York), 597–606.
[13]
Manshadi V, Ovies Gharan S, Saberi A (2012) Online stochastic matching: Online actions based on offline statistics. Math. Oper. Res. 37(4):559–573.
[14]
McDiarmid C (1989) On the method of bounded differences. Siemons J. ed. Surveys in Combinatorics, London Math. Soc. Lect. Note Series, Vol. 141 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 148–188.
[15]
Mehta A, Saberi A, Vazirani U, Varirani V (2005) AdWords and generalized online matching. FOCS '05: Proc. 46th Annual IEEE Sympos. Foundations Comput. Sci. (IEEE, Washington, DC), 264–273.
[16]
Mehta A, Saberi A, Vazirani U, Vazirani V (2007) AdWords and generalized on-line matching. J. ACM 54(5):22.
[17]
Mirrokni V, Ovies Gharan S, Zadimoghaddam M (2012) Simultaneous approximations for adversarial and stochastic online budgeted allocation. SODA '12: Proc. 23rd Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (SIAM, Philadelphia), 1690–1701.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. Online Stochastic Matching: New Algorithms with Better Bounds
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Information & Contributors

        Information

        Published In

        cover image Mathematics of Operations Research
        Mathematics of Operations Research  Volume 39, Issue 3
        August 2014
        352 pages
        ISSN:0364-765X
        DOI:10.1287/moor.2014.39.issue-3
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Publisher

        INFORMS

        Linthicum, MD, United States

        Publication History

        Published: 01 August 2014
        Received: 14 May 2012

        Author Tags

        1. online bipartite matching
        2. stochastic optimization
        3. offline linear programming bounds

        Qualifiers

        • Research-article

        Contributors

        Other Metrics

        Bibliometrics & Citations

        Bibliometrics

        Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
        Reflects downloads up to 14 Sep 2024

        Other Metrics

        Citations

        Cited By

        View all

        View Options

        View options

        Get Access

        Login options

        Media

        Figures

        Other

        Tables

        Share

        Share

        Share this Publication link

        Share on social media