Description

We want to minimize the expected cost of evaluating a symmetric Pseudo-Boolean function f(x1,..,xn):{0,1}n→{1,...,B}f(x_1,..,x_n) : \{0,1\}^n \to \{1,...,B\} on initially unknown input, where the value of each xix_i is unknown and can be learned only by paying positive cost cic_i, and each xix_i has independent probability pip_i of being 11. Value of function ff equals jj if the score ∑xi\sum x_i satisfies αj≤∑xi≤αj+1−1\alpha_j \leq \sum x_i \leq \alpha_{j+1} -1. Test until this is known. This is symmetric as it only depends on number of 1's in the input.

Notes

Approximation ratios

where below algorithms are α-approximation algorithms
(Note substrategies: P0P_0, increasing ci/(1−pi)c_i/(1-p_i) order, P1P_1, increasing ci/pic_i/p_i order, PcP_c, increasing cic_i order)

22-approximation for block verification

  • [Liu 2022] verifying strategy VjV_j on block jj: first evaluate αj+βj\alpha_j + \beta_j variables according to PcP_c order, where αj\alpha_j is the min number of 1's and βj\beta_j the min number of 0's to satisfy block jj, then if found sufficient 1's, test next in P0P_0, else if found sufficient 0's, test next in P1P_1

66-approximation

  • [Liu 2022] a non-adaptive algorithm, a round-robin strategy RR exists giving a 66-approximation evaluation
    • this switches between 3 sub-strategies, choosing the one that has minimal total running cost after the next evaluation, P0,P1,PcP_0, P_1, P_c
  • [Liu 2022] another non-adaptive algorithm, round-robin strategy, RR2 gives a 66-approximation
    • switch between 2 sub-strategies, P0P_0 and P1P_1, using minimal total running cost upon additional evaluation

(3+22)(3+2\sqrt{2})-approximation, note 3+22≈5.8283+2\sqrt{2} \approx 5.828

  • [Plank, Schewior 2024] non-adaptive algorithm 3R is ROUNDROBIN⁡(Afail,Asucc,Ach,αfail,αsucc,αch)\operatorname{ROUNDROBIN}(A_{fail}, A_{succ}, A_{ch}, \alpha_{fail}, \alpha_{succ}, \alpha_{ch}) (c.f. RR) giving constant-factor approximation, (3+22)(3 + 2 \sqrt{2})-approximation algorithm for SSC
    • where AfailA_{fail} is P0P_0, AsuccA_{succ} is P1P_1, AchA_{ch} is PcP_c
    • at each step, choose h∗∈arg⁡minh∈1,...,k⁡1/αh⋅(Ch+δh)h^* \in \arg\min_{h \in {1,...,k}} 1/\alpha_h \cdot (C_h + \delta_h) until f(x)f(x) determined, δh\delta_h is cost of previously not performed task in strategy AhA_h
  • [Plank, Schewior 2024] non-adaptive algorithm 2R giving constant-factor approximation

References

  1. D. Gkenosis, N. Grammel, L. Hellerstein, and D. Kletenik, “The Stochastic Score Classification Problem,” Jun. 27, 2018, arXiv: arXiv:1806.10660. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1806.10660.
  2. N. Liu, “Two 6-approximation Algorithms for the Stochastic Score Classification Problem,” Dec. 05, 2022, arXiv: arXiv:2212.02370. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2212.02370.
  3. B. M. Plank and K. Schewior, “Simple Algorithms for Stochastic Score Classification with Small Approximation Ratios,” SIAM J. Discrete Math., vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 2069–2088, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1137/22M1523492.