Table of Contents
Fetching ...

A threshold for online balancing of sparse i.i.d. vectors

Dylan J. Altschuler, Konstantin Tikhomirov

TL;DR

This work analyzes online vector balancing for iid $d$-sparse binary vectors with horizon $T=Θ(n)$, introducing a mean-field model $A\sim\mathcal{M}_{n,T,d}$ and a prefix-discrepancy framework. It proves a matching pair of results: any online algorithm incurs at least $Ω(\log\log n)$ discrepancy (for a broad range of $d$) while an explicit, near-linear-time online algorithm achieves $O(\log\log n)$ prefix discrepancy with high probability, revealing a sharp gap between online and offline Beck–Fiala in the average-case setting. Notably, in the admissible sparsity range, the optimal online discrepancy is independent of $d$ and the column norms, highlighting a threshold phenomenon. The analysis leverages a spread-based lower bound and a delicate exceptional-row control in the online setting, with extensions to broader time horizons via padding and concatenation.

Abstract

Consider the task of \textit{online} vector balancing for stochastic arrivals $(X_i)_{i \in [T]}$, where the time horizon satisfies $T = Θ(n)$, and the $X_i$ are i.i.d uniform $d$--sparse $n$--dimensional binary vectors, with $2\leq d \le (\log\log n)^2/\log\log\log n$. We show that for this range of parameters, every online algorithm incurs discrepancy at least $Ω(\log \log n)$, and there is an efficient algorithm which achieves a matching discrepancy bound of $O(\log\log n)$ w.h.p. This establishes an asymptotic gap, both existential and algorithmic, between the online and offline versions of the average--case Beck--Fiala problem. Strikingly, the optimal online discrepancy in the considered setting is order $\log \log n$, independent of $d$ and the norms of the vectors $(X_i)_i$. Our assumptions on $d$ are nearly optimal, as this independence ceases when $d=ω((\log\log n)^2)$.

A threshold for online balancing of sparse i.i.d. vectors

TL;DR

This work analyzes online vector balancing for iid -sparse binary vectors with horizon , introducing a mean-field model and a prefix-discrepancy framework. It proves a matching pair of results: any online algorithm incurs at least discrepancy (for a broad range of ) while an explicit, near-linear-time online algorithm achieves prefix discrepancy with high probability, revealing a sharp gap between online and offline Beck–Fiala in the average-case setting. Notably, in the admissible sparsity range, the optimal online discrepancy is independent of and the column norms, highlighting a threshold phenomenon. The analysis leverages a spread-based lower bound and a delicate exceptional-row control in the online setting, with extensions to broader time horizons via padding and concatenation.

Abstract

Consider the task of \textit{online} vector balancing for stochastic arrivals , where the time horizon satisfies , and the are i.i.d uniform --sparse --dimensional binary vectors, with . We show that for this range of parameters, every online algorithm incurs discrepancy at least , and there is an efficient algorithm which achieves a matching discrepancy bound of w.h.p. This establishes an asymptotic gap, both existential and algorithmic, between the online and offline versions of the average--case Beck--Fiala problem. Strikingly, the optimal online discrepancy in the considered setting is order , independent of and the norms of the vectors . Our assumptions on are nearly optimal, as this independence ceases when .

Paper Structure

This paper contains 9 sections, 10 theorems, 115 equations, 1 algorithm.

Key Result

Theorem 1.1

Let $T = n$, and let $X_1,\dots,X_T$ be independent and uniformly random $d$--sparse binary vectors. Then, for any $2 \le d \le n/2$, any online algorithm for assigning $\sigma \in \{-1,+1\}^T$ satisfies: w.h.p., On the other hand, for $d \le (\log\log n)^2 / \log\log\log n$, there is an explicit near-linear time online algorithm for assigning $\sigma$, satisfying: w.h.p.,

Theorems & Definitions (30)

  • Theorem 1.1
  • Remark 1.2: Extensions to other time horizons: upper bound
  • Remark 1.3: Extensions to other time horizons: lower bound
  • Definition 1.4: Online algorithm
  • Definition 1.5: Matrix model
  • Definition 1.6: Prefix operations
  • Theorem 1.7: Lower bound
  • Theorem 1.8: Upper bound
  • Definition 1.9: Optimal expected online discrepancy
  • Conjecture 1
  • ...and 20 more