Michael Dinitz

Michael Dinitz, Bob Dong

``Algorithms with predictions'', or ``learning-augmented algorithms'', has proved to be an extremely useful paradigm for combining machine learning with traditional algorithms. One of the textbook settings for this is searching a sorted array. Without a prediction, classical binary search takes $O(\log n)$ queries, while with a prediction we can use ``doubling binary search'' to find the target key using $O(\log η)$ queries, where $η$ is the error of the prediction measured as the absolute value of the difference between the true location and the predicted location. Since an array is just a path graph, in this paper we ask whether similar bounds can be achieved for search on even slightly more general graphs: trees. We show first that the high-level answer is ``no'': there is no search algorithm that uses $O(\log η)$ queries, where $η$ is now the graph distance between the predicted location and the true location. However, as our main result, we show that such bounds can be achieved on trees which are ``path-like'' in that they have low \emph{pathwidth}. In particular, we prove that there is a search algorithm which uses at most $O(k \log η)$ queries, where $k$ is the pathwidth of the tree. We also prove a lower bound showing that our algorithm has existentially optimal query complexity. Finally, we show experimentally, on real-life inputs, that our algorithm has query complexity which is notably better than the simple non-prediction-based algorithm.

Michael Dinitz, Sungjin Im, Thomas Lavastida et al. · cmu

The research area of algorithms with predictions has seen recent success showing how to incorporate machine learning into algorithm design to improve performance when the predictions are correct, while retaining worst-case guarantees when they are not. Most previous work has assumed that the algorithm has access to a single predictor. However, in practice, there are many machine learning methods available, often with incomparable generalization guarantees, making it hard to pick a best method a priori. In this work we consider scenarios where multiple predictors are available to the algorithm and the question is how to best utilize them. Ideally, we would like the algorithm's performance to depend on the quality of the best predictor. However, utilizing more predictions comes with a cost, since we now have to identify which prediction is the best. We study the use of multiple predictors for a number of fundamental problems, including matching, load balancing, and non-clairvoyant scheduling, which have been well-studied in the single predictor setting. For each of these problems we introduce new algorithms that take advantage of multiple predictors, and prove bounds on the resulting performance.

Qiming Cui, Michael Dinitz

We revisit the central online problem of ski rental in the "algorithms with predictions" framework from the point of view of distributional predictions. Ski rental was one of the first problems to be studied with predictions, where a natural prediction is simply the number of ski days. But it is both more natural and potentially more powerful to think of a prediction as a distribution p-hat over the ski days. If the true number of ski days is drawn from some true (but unknown) distribution p, then we show as our main result that there is an algorithm with expected cost at most OPT + O(min(max({eta}, 1) * sqrt(b), b log b)), where OPT is the expected cost of the optimal policy for the true distribution p, b is the cost of buying, and {eta} is the Earth Mover's (Wasserstein-1) distance between p and p-hat. Note that when {eta} < o(sqrt(b)) this gives additive loss less than b (the trivial bound), and when {eta} is arbitrarily large (corresponding to an extremely inaccurate prediction) we still do not pay more than O(b log b) additive loss. An implication of these bounds is that our algorithm has consistency O(sqrt(b)) (additive loss when the prediction error is 0) and robustness O(b log b) (additive loss when the prediction error is arbitrarily large). Moreover, we do not need to assume that we know (or have any bound on) the prediction error {eta}, in contrast with previous work in robust optimization which assumes that we know this error. We complement this upper bound with a variety of lower bounds showing that it is essentially tight: not only can the consistency/robustness tradeoff not be improved, but our particular loss function cannot be meaningfully improved.

Michael Dinitz, Sungjin Im, Thomas Lavastida et al.

Algorithms with (machine-learned) predictions is a powerful framework for combining traditional worst-case algorithms with modern machine learning. However, the vast majority of work in this space assumes that the prediction itself is non-probabilistic, even if it is generated by some stochastic process (such as a machine learning system). This is a poor fit for modern ML, particularly modern neural networks, which naturally generate a distribution. We initiate the study of algorithms with distributional predictions, where the prediction itself is a distribution. We focus on one of the simplest yet fundamental settings: binary search (or searching a sorted array). This setting has one of the simplest algorithms with a point prediction, but what happens if the prediction is a distribution? We show that this is a richer setting: there are simple distributions where using the classical prediction-based algorithm with any single prediction does poorly. Motivated by this, as our main result, we give an algorithm with query complexity $O(H(p) + \log η)$, where $H(p)$ is the entropy of the true distribution $p$ and $η$ is the earth mover's distance between $p$ and the predicted distribution $\hat p$. This also yields the first distributionally-robust algorithm for the classical problem of computing an optimal binary search tree given a distribution over target keys. We complement this with a lower bound showing that this query complexity is essentially optimal (up to constants), and experiments validating the practical usefulness of our algorithm.

Amy Babay, Michael Dinitz, Aravind Srinivasan et al.

The spread of an epidemic is often modeled by an SIR random process on a social network graph. The MinINF problem for optimal social distancing involves minimizing the expected number of infections, when we are allowed to break at most $B$ edges; similarly the MinINFNode problem involves removing at most $B$ vertices. These are fundamental problems in epidemiology and network science. While a number of heuristics have been considered, the complexity of these problems remains generally open. In this paper, we present two bicriteria approximation algorithms for MinINF, which give the first non-trivial approximations for this problem. The first is based on the cut sparsification result of Karger \cite{karger:mathor99}, and works when the transmission probabilities are not too small. The second is a Sample Average Approximation (SAA) based algorithm, which we analyze for the Chung-Lu random graph model. We also extend some of our results to tackle the MinINFNode problem.

Michael Dinitz, Sungjin Im, Thomas Lavastida et al.

A recent line of research investigates how algorithms can be augmented with machine-learned predictions to overcome worst case lower bounds. This area has revealed interesting algorithmic insights into problems, with particular success in the design of competitive online algorithms. However, the question of improving algorithm running times with predictions has largely been unexplored. We take a first step in this direction by combining the idea of machine-learned predictions with the idea of "warm-starting" primal-dual algorithms. We consider one of the most important primitives in combinatorial optimization: weighted bipartite matching and its generalization to $b$-matching. We identify three key challenges when using learned dual variables in a primal-dual algorithm. First, predicted duals may be infeasible, so we give an algorithm that efficiently maps predicted infeasible duals to nearby feasible solutions. Second, once the duals are feasible, they may not be optimal, so we show that they can be used to quickly find an optimal solution. Finally, such predictions are useful only if they can be learned, so we show that the problem of learning duals for matching has low sample complexity. We validate our theoretical findings through experiments on both real and synthetic data. As a result we give a rigorous, practical, and empirically effective method to compute bipartite matchings.

Michael Dinitz, Aravind Srinivasan, Leonidas Tsepenekas et al.

Graph cut problems are fundamental in Combinatorial Optimization, and are a central object of study in both theory and practice. Furthermore, the study of \emph{fairness} in Algorithmic Design and Machine Learning has recently received significant attention, with many different notions proposed and analyzed for a variety of contexts. In this paper we initiate the study of fairness for graph cut problems by giving the first fair definitions for them, and subsequently we demonstrate appropriate algorithmic techniques that yield a rigorous theoretical analysis. Specifically, we incorporate two different notions of fairness, namely \emph{demographic} and \emph{probabilistic individual} fairness, in a particular cut problem that models disaster containment scenarios. Our results include a variety of approximation algorithms with provable theoretical guarantees.

Raman Arora, Michael Dinitz, Teodor V. Marinov et al.

The notion of \emph{policy regret} in online learning is a well defined? performance measure for the common scenario of adaptive adversaries, which more traditional quantities such as external regret do not take into account. We revisit the notion of policy regret and first show that there are online learning settings in which policy regret and external regret are incompatible: any sequence of play that achieves a favorable regret with respect to one definition must do poorly with respect to the other. We then focus on the game-theoretic setting where the adversary is a self-interested agent. In that setting, we show that external regret and policy regret are not in conflict and, in fact, that a wide class of algorithms can ensure a favorable regret with respect to both definitions, so long as the adversary is also using such an algorithm. We also show that the sequence of play of no-policy regret algorithms converges to a \emph{policy equilibrium}, a new notion of equilibrium that we introduce. Relating this back to external regret, we show that coarse correlated equilibria, which no-external regret players converge to, are a strict subset of policy equilibria. Thus, in game-theoretic settings, every sequence of play with no external regret also admits no policy regret, but the converse does not hold.