In the classical Maximum Acyclic Subgraph problem (MAS), given a directed-edge weighted graph, we are required to find an ordering of the nodes that maximizes the total weight of forward-directed edges. MAS admits a 2 approximation, and this approximation is optimal under the Unique Game Conjecture. In this paper we consider a generalization of MAS, the Restricted Maximum Acyclic Subgraph problem (RMAS), where each node is associated with a list of integer labels, and we have to find a labeling of the nodes so as to maximize the weight of edges whose head label is larger than the tail label. The best known (almost trivial) approximation for RMAS is 4. The interest of RMAS is mostly due to its connections with the Vertex Pricing problem (VP). In VP we are given an undirected graph with positive edge budgets. A feasible solution consists of an assignment of non-negative prices to the nodes. The profit for each edge @math is the sum of its endpoints prices if that sum is at most the budget of @math , and zero otherwise. Our goal is to maximize the total profit. The best known approximation for VP, which works analogously to the mentioned approximation algorithm for RMAS, is 4. Improving on that is a challenging open problem. On the other hand, the best known 2 inapproximability result is due to a reduction from a special case of RMAS. In this paper we present an improved LP-rounding @math approximation for RMAS. Our result shows that, in order to prove a 4 hardness of approximation result for VP (if possible), one should consider reductions from harder problems. Alternatively, our approach might suggest a different way to design approximation algorithms for VP.
Something more about MAS. How that the 2-apx work? Why does not generalize to RMAS? The intuitive argument is that for MAS the optimum is always at least @math . Our interest in RMAS is motivated by the following problem (VP): we are given an undirected (multi-) graph @math , with positive edge budgets @math . Our goal is to assign a non-negative price @math to each node @math so as to maximize the sum @math over the edges @math such that @math . @cite_10 proved that VP is @math -hard to approximate (under UGC) via a reduction from a special case of RMAS. Their reduction exploits instances of RMAS where labels are non-negative, each @math contains @math , and @math for any distinct @math . Note that such instances still generalize MAS. I meant more details about the reduction to VP. Why do you want to stress the special case of RMAS? The reductions are always special in some sense
@cite_10
1777669883
The multiple knapsack problem (MKP) is a natural and well-known generalization of the single knapsack problem and is defined as follows. We are given a set of @math items and @math bins (knapsacks) such that each item @math has a profit @math and a size @math , and each bin @math has a capacity @math . The goal is to find a subset of items of maximum profit such that they have a feasible packing in the bins. MKP is a special case of the generalized assignment problem (GAP) where the profit and the size of an item can vary based on the specific bin that it is assigned to. GAP is APX-hard and a 2-approximation, for it is implicit in the work of Shmoys and Tardos [Math. Program. A, 62 (1993), pp. 461-474], and thus far, this was also the best known approximation for MKP @. The main result of this paper is a polynomial time approximation scheme (PTAS) for MKP @. Apart from its inherent theoretical interest as a common generalization of the well-studied knapsack and bin packing problems, it appears to be the strongest special case of GAP that is not APX-hard. We substantiate this by showing that slight generalizations of MKP are APX-hard. Thus our results help demarcate the boundary at which instances of GAP become APX-hard. An interesting aspect of our approach is a PTAS-preserving reduction from an arbitrary instance of MKP to an instance with @math distinct sizes and profits.